The 2024-25 Institutional Integrity Committees (IICs) Performance Monitoring Report has revealed a worrying lack of integrity across several government ministries, departments and agencies (MDAs), despite strong performance by Local Government authorities.
According to the report, Local Government authorities—including district and city councils— emerged as the best performers, with 55 percent of councils scoring above 75 percent.
Statutory corporations such as water boards and regulatory bodies followed, with 33 percent achieving scores above 75 percent.
In contrast, performance among other MDAs was largely weak, with only 35 percent scoring above 50 percent, a situation the report describes as alarming.
- Advertisement -
This disparity shows that while local councils are registering strong integrity outcomes, several key ministries continue to record very low scores.
- Advertisement -
The assessment ranked IICs out of 100 percent using established performance standards. IICs are mandated to promote ethical conduct, prevent corruption and strengthen internal control systems within public institutions.
Among the highest performers were Blantyre Water Board, which scored 96 percent, and the National Construction Industry Council with 95 percent.
District councils also featured prominently, with M’mbelwa, Neno and Dedza district councils each scoring 92 percent.
Other strong performers included the Reserve Bank of Malawi at 90 percent and the Public Procurement and Disposal of Assets Authority, which scored 89 percent. These institutions were commended for having robust integrity systems and effective oversight mechanisms.
- Advertisement -
However, the report flagged several institutions with extremely low scores, highlighting weak or ineffective integrity structures.
The Ministry of Justice recorded the lowest score at just 1.3 percent, followed by the Malawi School of Government–Mpemba at 7 percent.
Other low performers included the Ministry of Health at 17 percent; the Ministry of Defence and the Ministry of Mining at 18 percent each; and the Department of Human Resource Management and Development at 15 percent.
The report notes that such results point to serious gaps in internal controls, leadership support and anti-corruption efforts.
Despite the uneven performance, the report highlights clear gains in institutions where IICs are active and supported by management. These gains include strengthened systems and procedures, improved service delivery, increased revenue collection through digitisation and monitoring as well as greater public confidence in reporting unethical behaviour.
The report also cites stronger investigations leading to dismissals and disciplinary action, recovery of undelivered goods, detection of fake receipts, reduced fraud through digital systems and improved targeting of social protection programmes.
The report says in several cases, disciplinary measures taken following investigations have served as a deterrent to further misconduct.
Transparency and Integrity Expert Willy Kambwandira said IICs can be effective tools for fighting corruption when adequately supported by leadership.
“The wide gap between high and low-performing institutions underscores the urgent need for stronger oversight, capacity building and accountability, particularly in underperforming MDAs,” he said.
National Advocacy Platform Chairperson Benedicto Kondowe said the report exposes a governance paradox: institutions closest to citizens are performing better than those controlling the largest public resources.
