The Malawi Law Society (MLS) has questioned the constitutionality of President Peter Mutharika's directive to postpone the Fourth Meeting of the 52nd Session of Parliament. In a statement, the society argued that the President has no legal authority to direct the Speaker to suspend a parliamentary sitting. Section 59(1) of the Constitution does not empower the President to direct the Speaker on whether or when Parliament should meet. The society's chairperson, Davis Njobvu, and honorary secretary, Francis M'mame, signed the statement.
The MLS statement said the President's powers are limited to summoning an extraordinary meeting of the National Assembly and proroguing Parliament, in consultation with the Speaker. The society added that the President's directive to postpone the meeting was therefore beyond his constitutional authority. The directive was contained in a letter dated October 23, 2026, in which Mutharika directed Speaker Sameer Suleman to postpone the meeting until the next Budget Meeting. This decision allows resources to be redirected towards addressing El Niño and fuel-related challenges.
The postponement comes amid growing tensions between the Executive and Legislature following Suleman's decision to establish 12 ad hoc parliamentary committees to investigate issues affecting Malawians. The Mid-Year Budget Review Meeting, scheduled to begin on November 9, is particularly important as it provides an opportunity for the government to assess budget implementation and adjust allocations in response to prevailing economic conditions. The review is crucial for adjusting the national budget to address current economic challenges.
The MLS expressed concern that the Speaker complied with the President's directive, arguing that such compliance undermines the constitutional separation of powers. The society cited Sections 7, 8, and 9 of the Constitution, which establish the Executive, Legislature, and Judiciary as separate arms of government, each expected to exercise its powers independently. The society emphasized that the separation of powers requires each arm to perform its role without domination by another.
The society reminded both the President and the Speaker that their respective offices derive their authority from the people and that their powers must be exercised in trust for the public. The MLS urged Suleman to reconsider the postponement, noting that he had already consulted the President, set a date for the meeting, and caused it to be published in the Government Gazette. The postponement would deprive Parliament of an opportunity to scrutinize the performance of ministries, departments, and agencies.
The MLS also observed that government institutions cannot lawfully spend beyond the funds appropriated by Parliament during the previous sitting. While acknowledging the need to be prudent with public resources, the society warned that decisions made to protect or preserve such resources should have a sound basis in law. The Constitution does not prescribe a maximum period for postponing a parliamentary meeting or specify circumstances under which postponement is permissible or prohibited.
The Attorney General was requested to comment on the MLS statement but had not responded by press time. Section 59(2) of the Constitution requires Parliament to hold at least three meetings during each session. The controversy surrounding the postponement of Parliament's meeting highlights the ongoing tensions between the Executive and Legislature in Malawi.
Key points
- The Malawi Law Society questions President Peter Mutharika's directive to postpone Parliament's Fourth Meeting, citing a lack of constitutional authority.
- The postponement is amid growing tensions between the Executive and Legislature, particularly over the establishment of ad hoc parliamentary committees.
- The Malawi Law Society urges the Speaker to reconsider the postponement, citing the importance of the Mid-Year Budget Review Meeting.
