The presidency of Patrick Mpaka at the Malawi Law Society (MLS) was defined by visible reform activism and assertive institutional positioning. Over four years, Mpaka presided over some of the most consequential internal and structural interventions in the recent history of the Society.
During the March 2025 elective conference, prominent legal pundits, including Mordecai Msiska – SC and Samuel Tembenu, explicitly described Patrick Mpaka’s four-year leadership as “visionary” and hailed his tenure as a period of significant institutional growth.
At the centre of his tenure was a clear theme: judicial accountability.
The constitution of a Special Inquiry into the conduct of court business at the High Court Commercial Division became a defining moment. The inquiry was not merely symbolic. It documented concerns about procedural irregularities, enforcement practices and case allocation patterns. It recommended referral to the Judicial Service Commission (JSC) and proposed monitoring mechanisms within the Society itself.
Following the release of the report in 2023, Mpaka formally petitioned the JSC to consider disciplinary processes. Publicly, the MLS under his leadership framed the issue as one of institutional integrity rather than individual grievance.
The Society’s messaging at the time was clear: professional self-regulation is essential to sustaining public confidence in the judiciary.
Beyond the inquiry, Mpaka was a primary driver behind the Judicial Reform Acts — including constitutional amendments and the Judicial Service Administration Act — aimed at strengthening accountability mechanisms within the judiciary. These legislative reforms came into force on 1 February 2025, shortly before the end of his tenure.
During his final addresses, Mpaka repeatedly emphasized the need to “put the house in order,” warning that internal indiscipline among legal practitioners could erode the profession’s moral authority to challenge other arms of government.
His presidency therefore left behind tangible benchmarks: formal investigation of judicial conduct, legislative reform advocacy, structured engagement with the JSC, and public positioning of MLS as a constitutional watchdog.
Transition to Njobvu: Continuity or drift?
When Davis Njobvu was elected MLS President in March 2025, he pledged to “build on the previous executive’s efforts” and to deal decisively with malpractice within the legal system.
Njobvu himself framed his tenure as a fight against internal rot, stating: “Corruption is not just a buzzword; it’s a cancer that is eating away at our justice system”.
His primary pledge was to ensure that “imbalances existing in the legal profession are addressed,” signaling a shift from Mpaka’s institutional building toward active policing of the bar.
One year into his tenure, the evaluation is more complex.
The Judicial Reform Acts are technically in force. However, implementation has faced delays. The proposed Independent Commission on Judicial Conduct (ICJC), envisioned as a key accountability mechanism, has yet to be fully operationalised, with concerns raised over budgetary allocation and executive follow-through.
The current MLS leadership has publicly faulted government for failing to take “meaningful steps” toward implementation of certain reform measures. Yet critics argue that the Society itself must maintain consistent pressure to ensure that reform does not stall.
On judicial misconduct specifically, members have expressed frustration that the JSC has not publicly concluded high-profile disciplinary matters arising from the 2023 inquiry. While the MLS has continued to issue statements, some within the fraternity believe the assertive posture seen during Mpaka’s tenure has softened.
Within his first year, Njobvu has maintained a high-profile “neutrality” that some describe as a “snub” to controversial figures. For example, he rejected lawyer Alexious Kamangila’s request for protection in a defamation case, insisting the MLS must “carefully guard its position of neutrality” in personal legal disputes.
Supporters of the current executive argue that institutional engagement often shifts from public confrontation to structured negotiation once reforms enter implementation stages. Critics counter that visibility matters in accountability processes, especially where public confidence has been shaken.
The Kamangira factor
The public allegations made by Alexious Kamangila in late 2024 intensified scrutiny of judicial accountability. His claims of corruption within sections of the legal fraternity placed renewed pressure on the MLS to demonstrate consistency in its reform agenda.
Under Mpaka’s leadership, the Society had already initiated a formal inquiry into Commercial Division concerns before Kamangira’s social media campaign gained prominence. This chronology is significant.
However, the MLS response to Kamangira during Njobvu’s tenure has been more restrained. The Society declined to represent him in a defamation dispute, citing subscription compliance and the personal nature of the matter. At the same time, it reiterated its institutional commitment to due process and professional standards.
The contrast in tone is evident. Where Mpaka’s presidency was marked by proactive structural intervention, Njobvu’s first year has been characterized by defensive institutional positioning amid heightened public controversy.
Prosecution accountability and legislative gaps
Another benchmark inherited by the current leadership involves prosecutorial accountability. During Mpaka’s tenure, the MLS frequently challenged the broad powers of the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) to discontinue cases without detailed public explanation.
In February 2026, the MLS under Njobvu issued a strong rebuke following the collapse of several high-profile corruption cases. However, legislative amendments aimed at curbing what critics describe as “near-absolute” prosecutorial discretion have not yet materialised.
This gap highlights a broader tension: public statements without parallel legislative advancement risk diminishing reform credibility.
Internal discipline within the profession
Mpaka’s final year also saw increased emphasis on lawyer discipline. Reports indicate that professional misconduct complaints rose significantly between 2024 and 2025.
Njobvu has pledged to “level the playing field” and ensure that no practitioner is shielded by seniority. The effectiveness of that pledge, however, will depend on measurable disciplinary outcomes.
Perception within sections of the profession suggests that disciplinary mechanisms continue to struggle in acting as a sufficient deterrent against senior practitioners accused of ethical breaches. Whether this perception reflects structural limitation or transitional adjustment remains to be seen.
Where is MLS heading?
The core question is not whether Davis Njobvu has abandoned reform. It is whether he has sustained its momentum with equal intensity.
Mpaka’s tenure established: A documented inquiry into judicial conduct. Legislative reform milestones. Public-facing constitutional advocacy. Direct engagement with disciplinary authorities.
Njobvu’s first year presents a test of consolidation: Will the Judicial Reform Acts move from statute to operational reality? Will outstanding disciplinary matters receive visible resolution? Will internal professional discipline demonstrate impartiality? Will legislative gaps around prosecutorial power be addressed?
The Malawi Law Society’s credibility rests on continuity. Reform cannot depend on the personality of its president. It must embed itself into institutional culture.
One year into new leadership, the Society stands at a crossroads: transition from reform activism to reform execution — or drift from assertiveness to administrative caution.
