2025 vote exposed an MCP leadership crisis

By Michael Martin//MALAWI

● MCP faces leadership questions in post-election — Chaima

● A nation decides, a party divides — James

● Power shifts and party rifts — Phiri

On the morning of 16 September 2025, Malawi awoke to a familiar yet profound ritual of democracy.

Before the sun rose, long queues had already formed at polling stations across the country. From crowded urban centers to remote rural villages, citizens wrapped in sweaters and blankets waited patiently, united by a shared belief that their vote could shape the nation’s future.

By the time polling stations officially opened, the atmosphere was calm but charged with anticipation.

Electoral officials checked registers, party monitors took their positions, and security personnel maintained order.

By daybreak, more than four million Malawians had cast their ballots, marking one of the highest voter turnouts in the country’s recent electoral history and underscoring the significance voters attached to the moment.

The 2025 general election was widely described as one of the most competitive since the return to multiparty democracy.

The ballot paper itself told the story of a crowded and contested political landscape.

Nearly 23 presidential candidates were in the race, representing a mix of established political forces and emerging alternatives.

At the center of attention were three dominant figures namely Professor Peter Mutharika of the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), seeking a political comeback; incumbent President Lazarus Chakwera of the Malawi Congress Party (MCP), defending his record in office; and Dr. Dalitso Kabambe of the UTM, positioning himself as a technocratic alternative.

Their campaigns crisscrossed the country, each promising solutions to deepening economic challenges.

As polls closed and ballot boxes were sealed, counting began at constituency tally centres. Initial results suggested a tight race, fueling intense speculation both online and offline.

Political analysts cautioned against early conclusions, reminding the nation that Malawi’s electoral outcomes often shift as results from different regions are added.

However, as the night wore on, a clearer pattern began to emerge. Results streaming in from several key regions showed the DPP steadily pulling ahead.

Constituencies that had swung toward MCP in previous elections began reverting to DPP, signaling a possible shift in voter sentiment.

Within days, the suspense ended. Malawi Electoral Commission Chairperson Anabel Mtalimanja addressed the nation and officially announced the results.

She said in a soft bold statement: “Professor Peter Mutharika had won the presidency with 57 percent of the vote, comfortably surpassing the constitutional 50+1 requirement.”

The margin left little room for dispute. With the declaration, Mutharika was sworn in as Malawi’s 7th President, completing one of the most remarkable political comebacks in the country’s history.

Supporters hailed the result as a return to experience, while critics viewed it as a rejection of the incumbent administration rather than an outright endorsement of the opposition.

President Lazarus Chakwera accepted the outcome, conceding defeat and pledging to respect the will of the people.

His concession helped ensure a peaceful transition of power. Yet beyond the orderly handover lay a deeper political reckoning, particularly for the Malawi Congress Party.

For many Malawians, the election outcome represented a verdict on governance.

During MCP’s time in office, the country endured persistent shortages of sugar, chronic fuel scarcity, foreign exchange constraints, and rising food insecurity.

These challenges placed immense strain on households, businesses and public confidence in government leadership.

Governance pundit George Chaima argues that the election was less about political personalities and more about lived realities.

Chaima explained: “This was a performance-based election.

He agrees, noting that post election turmoil is common but revealing.

He said: “Defeat exposes cracks that power once concealed.

“The question is whether MCP chooses reform or denial.

“Voters punished what they perceived as failure to manage crises that directly affected their daily lives.”

In his remarks, political analyst Wonderful Mkhutche believes leadership style compounded these challenges.

He argues that President Chakwera’s perceived silence during moments of national distress created an image of detachment.

“People wanted reassurance, communication, and visible leadership.

“Instead, many felt ignored.
Adding to MCP’s difficulties were internal party tensions,” Mkhutche said.

Again, Political commentator Kingsley Kawaye says unresolved disputes and public disagreements weakened the party’s credibility.

“A party that appears divided cannot convincingly promise national unity,” he observed.

These concerns burst into the open when Nkhotakota Central Member of Parliament Sylvester Ayuba James, an MCP legislator and lawyer, publicly criticized his own party’s leadership.

In a widely shared Facebook post, Ayuba James alleged that MCP was experiencing a leadership vacuum and urgently needed renewal at the top.

He accused party president Lazarus Chakwera of remaining silent during the arrests of senior MCP officials and of going on holiday while some were still in custody.

To Ayuba James, this behaviour symbolized abandonment and a lack of moral leadership within the party.

Again, the MP directly linked MCP’s electoral defeat to its leadership’s failure to confront governance challenges under its watch.

He warned that without accountability and reform, the party risked further decline and loss of public relevance.

The controversy was deepened by irony. Ayuba James is also one of the defence lawyers representing some of the arrested MCP officials, including Secretary General Richard Chimwendo Banda.

His dual role sparked debate, with critics questioning his motives while supporters defended his right to speak out.

MCP spokesperson Jessie Kabwira strongly rejected Ayuba James’ claims, insisting that party members must follow established internal channels when raising concerns.

She warned that public criticism risked worsening divisions at a time when unity was crucial for rebuilding.
Governance analyst George Phiri sees the situation as part of a broader realignment.

 

 

Civil society has also weighed in. Sylvester Namiwa, executive director of the Centre for Democracy and Economic Development Initiatives (CDED), says the debate within MCP is healthy if managed transparently.

He argues that democratic parties must reflect honestly after losing power.

Namiwa cautions against turning leadership renewal into factional warfare.

“Malawians want political parties that listen, reform, and prioritize citizens over personal interests,” he said.

As President Mutharika begins his new term, expectations remain high.

Analysts argue that the strength of Malawi’s democracy will depend not only on the government’s performance but also on the ability of opposition parties, especially MCP, to reorganize and provide credible oversight.

For MCP, the path forward is uncertain and demanding.

The party must choose between defending its past or embracing change.

For ordinary Malawians, the hope is simpler: improved governance, economic stability, and leaders who listen.

The 16 September 2025 election crowned a president, but it also delivered a powerful lesson. In a democracy, power is never permanent.

Chakwera and his MCP booted out from the government for good due to his clues leadership.

About Author