Court adjourns hearing on anti begging law challenge in Blantyre
By Michael Martin//MALAWI
The Constitutional Court sitting in Blantyre has adjourned to February 11, 2026 a landmark case challenging the constitutionality of Malawi anti begging law.
The case concerns Section 180(b) of the Penal Code, a provision that criminalizes public begging.
The court granted both parties 21 days to submit final written arguments before it delivers its determination.
The adjournment follows detailed oral arguments and counter arguments presented earlier this week.
The matter is being heard by a panel of judges comprising Chimwemwe Kamowa, Anneline Kanthambi, and John Chirwa.
Petitioners in the case argue that the law unfairly targets vulnerable groups, particularly people with disabilities and the poor.
Lawyer Bob Chimkango, representing 13 petitioners, told the court that Section 180(b) is discriminatory in nature.
Chimkango argued that the provision unjustifiably limits fundamental human rights guaranteed under the Constitution.
He said many people who resort to begging do so because they lack access to employment or alternative sources of income.
According to Chimkango, criminalizing begging punishes people for their poverty rather than addressing its root causes.
He further argued that the law violates the rights to dignity, equality and freedom of movement.
Chimkango reminded the court of a 2017 ruling by a lower court which convicted the petitioners for begging.
In that ruling, the court also directed the government to assist the affected individuals with alternative livelihood options.
However, Chimkango told the Constitutional Court that the government failed to implement that directive.
He said the state’s failure to act forced the petitioners to seek constitutional relief.
In response, Senior State Advocate Ndoli Chiume defended the legality of Section 180(b).
Chiume argued that public begging infringes on the rights of both beggars and members of the public.
He said beggars are often exposed to abuse, exploitation and unsafe conditions on the streets.
Chiume also argued that members of the public are pressured or intimidated into giving alms.
According to the state, the law is intended to maintain public order and protect vulnerable individuals.
Chiume told the court that government is committed to helping people with disabilities access alternative economic activities.
He maintained that the law does not target poverty but seeks to regulate conduct in public spaces.
The court noted that the case raises important constitutional questions affecting social justice and human rights.
Judges said they require time to consider the legal submissions carefully before making a ruling.
The legal challenge is being supported by the Centre for Human Rights Education, Advice and Assistance (CHREAA).
The Southern Africa Litigation Centre is also backing the petitioners.
Civil society organizations view the case as a test of commitment to protecting vulnerable populations.
The outcome could have far reaching implications for how poverty related offences are treated in law.
A ruling in favour of the petitioners could lead to the repeal or amendment of the anti-begging provision.
The court is expected to deliver its guidance and final decision after receiving submissions on February 11, 2026.
About Author
