The political landscape is once again dominated by two familiar figures: incumbent President Lazarus Chakwera and former president Peter Mutharika.
Both have held the highest office in the land and both have faced significant criticism during their tenures.
For many Malawians, this election presents a troubling choice between two leaders who have already demonstrated their shortcomings.
Chakwera ascended to power in 2020 with promises of transformation and reform.
However, his administration has been marred by economic challenges and governance issues. Inflation has surged, reaching record levels, while unemployment remains a major issue, especially among the youth who were once Chakwera’s primary base of support.
- Advertisement -
A World Bank report indicated that Malawi’s GDP growth fell short of expectations, increasing by only a very small margin.
These economic difficulties have led to widespread dissatisfaction among the population.
Additionally, Chakwera’s leadership has been criticised for perceived nepotism and cronyism. His cabinet appointments have been scrutinised for favouring close associates, raising concerns about the administration’s commitment to merit-based governance.
On the other hand, Mutharika, who served as president from 2014 to 2020, is seeking a return to power.
- Advertisement -
- Advertisement -
His previous term was characterised by allegations of corruption and economic mismanagement.
The Constitutional Court annulled the 2019 election results, citing irregularities and ordering a fresh election.
Despite these controversies, Mutharika retains significant support in the Southern Region, particularly in areas where his party has deep political roots.
However, his inability to gain traction in the Central Region remains a formidable hurdle.
One of the most persistent criticisms of Mutharika’s presidency was the widespread perception that he was not fully in charge of his own government.
Throughout his tenure, many Malawians believed that real power rested not with the president himself but with a small group of unelected advisers and close allies.
These individuals were seen to wield disproportionate influence over critical decisions in government, from ministerial appointments to the awarding of contracts.
Mutharika’s detachment from day-to-day governance fostered an image of a leader who was either unwilling or unable to assert full control over the state apparatus.
This abdication of responsibility created an environment ripe for corruption and inefficiency, undermining public trust and further deepening the country’s governance crisis.
In this context, Mutharika’s bid for a comeback raises serious concerns about whether a return to his leadership would simply reinstate the same shadowy style of administration.
For many Malawians, the 2025 election presents a difficult choice between two leaders who have already proven their limitations.
The prospect of a run-off between Chakwera and Mutharika seems increasingly likely, given the fragmented nature of the opposition and the regional strongholds of both candidates.
This situation raises the question: are Malawians being forced to choose the lesser of two evils?
Both Chakwera and Mutharika have had their time in office and have failed to deliver on the promises they made. The desire for change is palpable but the available alternatives are limited.
In this context, new political figures like UTM’s Dalitso Kabambe have emerged as potential game-changers.
Kabambe’s appeal among the youth and other disillusioned voters provides a fresh alternative to the established political elite.
However, he does not command the same support as his predecessor, the late vice president Saulos Chilima.
The support of smaller parties will be crucial in determining the outcome of the election. If these groups can unite behind a single candidate, they may be able to challenge the dominance of Chakwera and Mutharika.
If all major parties choose to run independently, the risk of a run-off between Mutharika and Chakwera is high.
Such a scenario would likely result in one of them returning to power, perpetuating the cycle of political dissatisfaction.
The problems that have persisted during these two administrations are monumental, and neither candidate clearly presents a lesser evil.
The electorate is left grappling with the reality that the choices before them are not truly new but rather a continuation of past failures.
