LILONGWE-(MaraviPost)-About eleven months have passed since High Court Judge Patrick Chirwa, sitting as Chief Resident Magistrate ruled that former Malawi Energy Regulatory Authority (MERA) Chief Executive Officer Collins Magalasi, businesswoman Dorothy Shonga, and two other suspects have a case to answer in a high-profile corruption case.
The four were arrested in 2020 on allegations of abusing their positions to manipulate MERA’s Internal Procurement and Disposal Committee (IPDC) into awarding a lucrative MK186 million contract to Vink Enterprise, a company owned by Shonga.
The deal, which sparked a major scandal, raised concerns about procurement irregularities within MERA.
Delivering his ruling in March 2025, Judge Chirwa stated that the prosecution had presented sufficient evidence to warrant the accused defending themselves in court. The ruling effectively dismisses any possibility of an immediate acquittal and sets the stage for the defence to present its arguments.
“This court has carefully examined the evidence submitted by the State, and it is clear that the accused have questions to answer regarding their involvement in the contract awarding process,” Chirwa said.
The case revolves around allegations that Magalasi, in collaboration with Shonga and the other accused, bypassed standard procurement procedures to unlawfully benefit Vink Enterprise.
The Anti-Corruption Bureau (ACB), which led the investigation, has argued that the deal was tailored to favour Shonga’s company at the expense of transparency and fairness.
Following the ruling, legal experts say the accused had the opportunity to challenge the evidence and present their defence.
If found guilty, they could face severe penalties, including imprisonment and financial restitution.
The case attracted significant public attention, as it underscores ongoing efforts to combat corruption in Malawi.
Civil society organizations and governance watchdogs welcomed the court’s decision, urging authorities to ensure that justice is served without bias.
But now with eleven months after the ruling was made in March 2025, the case has never seen a day in the court.
Both ACB and Judiciary public relations office are yet to give reasons why the case has stalled for a year.
Why could such a high profile case stall like that after the suspects were found a case to answer? Who is sitting on the case
