Dear Readers,
We are closing the year 2025, and we need to move away from events and celebrations to tangible and effective movements that address social injustices against youth, women, and children. During events and celebrations, we make political declarations, call to actions, and demand from the affected populations. The questions we ask in this piece are (a) how many political declarations and commitments are achieved? (b) what are the investments in these sectors?
The month of November 2025 had many events, starting with the 19 Days of Activism on the Prevention of Child Abuse and Neglect, the National Children’s Summit, the Children20 at the G20 Summit in Johannesburg, and the African Committee of Experts on the Rights and Welfare of the Child (ACERWC) meeting in Lesotho, followed by the launch of this yearโs 16 Days of Activism against Gender-Based Violence (GBV) Campaign. While all these events are taking place, statistics continue to show that the protection of women and children remains a challenge.
The number of stalled cases in our courts relating to abuse and violence remains high, with issues often focusing on lack of evidence, allowing perpetrators to walk free with the expectation that we will curb the vice through our current actions. The judiciary and police have no resources when pursuing abuse and violence cases but seem to allocate resources to political cases. One wonders where they obtain funds for political cases when no resources are available for children’s issues. Perhaps children and women are considered less deserving of support. We have heard of a Presidential Committee to Respond to GBV that has remained silent. This highlights the problem of initiating one initiative to counter another.
The question we need to answer is why we are undertaking all these initiatives and events when statistics show increasing levels of abuse and violence against children. What actions are taken following the deliberations of the children’s parliaments? How are these translating into a reduction of abuse and violence in the communities? Does the increasing incidence of violence against women and children prompt us to reflect on our actions?
Recently, Professor Arthur Peter Mutharika queried government officials about the endless meetings taking place at various levels. The response was that the president confines the civil servants (๐๐ฑ๐ถ๐ญ๐ฆ ๐ข๐ฌ๐ถ๐ต๐ช๐ฌ๐ช๐บ๐ข). Mr President, this request should be directed to all development actors, not only in Malawi but worldwide. Sometimes, one questions whether a funded initiative for a period of six months will make a long-term difference. Recent discussions in Qatar focused on ending hunger, yet we are still grappling with whether the current approach to farming in Malawi will achieve this goal. As a nation, we are content to provide handouts that often do not reach the beneficiaries due to high levels of pilferage of resources along the way.
Our recent accountability to the affected populations reveals that the much-praised resources may not be reaching the vulnerable groups as we claim. There are high levels of ghost beneficiaries (z๐ช๐ต๐ฆ๐ฏ๐จ๐ฆ๐ญ๐ฐ ๐ป๐ข ๐ฎ๐ง๐ถ๐ฎ๐ถ) and forced sharing of relief work among poor targets, making the entire humanitarian assistance questionable. One very sad aspect of Accountability to Affected Populations (AAP) and Protection, while being flagged in the Inter-Agency Standing Committee (IASC), has increasingly become a “by-the-way activity,” which is a requirement for donors but is not taken seriously by the implementing partners. We cannot combat hunger and poverty with the same guidelines that are porous and not adhered to.
We conclude these discussions with a reflection on the shrinking space for Civil Society Organizations (CSOs). We acknowledge the vital role that CSOs play in development work. Recently, we observed the National Action Plan (NAP) CSO group restricting comments to be regulated by the administrators. When we raised this issue, we were corrected. However, it has not been taken lightly, as it represents CSOs shrinking their own space. We need to consider how, as CSOs, we contribute to this contraction.
Over the last six years, we have witnessed a reduction in our space. When this was highlighted during Human Rights Day on 10 December 2024, the then Vice President, Dr Michael Usi, insisted that CSOs meet with him. This was raised in the group, but there was an obvious silence. This is a concerning development, as we observed a climate of impunity during this period, with CSOs turning a blind eye. The Office of the Ombudsman noted that CSOs appeared to have been captured. One must wonder if we are truly fulfilling our role as CSOs. We are shrinking our own space through our attitudes, actions, and behaviours. It is crucial that we reflect seriously on this if we are to provide the necessary checks and balances. At the same time, we have faced scrutiny from the government regarding our impartiality as CSOs.
While we do wish to be seen as supportive of the government’s efforts to regulate CSOs, we must also caution that our own behaviours contribute to the shrinking of our spaces and create opportunities for government impunity. It is important to recognize that over the past five years, particularly governance-focused CSOs have gone on a sabbatical. During this time, issues arose; fuel queues were ubiquitous, and the economy declined. Notably, CSOs were not as effective during this period. As we begin to rethink our work, let us avoid becoming overly political and engage at every level, as we have no other choice. Our credibility depends on our behavior.
Wishing you an enjoyable reading experience in the last month of the year
