You don’t deserve contracts and pension: Malawi Constitutional Court dismisses domestic workers’ bid

April 18, 2026 03:26 PM

Malawi24 Reporter

Malawi domestic workers who sought employment contracts and pension rights through the Constitutional Court in Blantyre after the High Court dismissed their application challenging Section 27 of the Employment Act and Section 11 of the Pension Act

Judges rule employment and pension law exclusions do not violate workers’ rights

Domestic workers in Malawi have suffered a significant legal setback after the High Court ruled that employment and pension laws that exclude them from mandatory employment contracts and pension protection do not violate their rights.

A three judge panel comprising Justices Jack N’riva, Chimwemwe Kamowa and Allan Muhome dismissed the bid by Eliza Steven and the Registered Trustees of the Domestic and Vulnerable Workers Association on behalf of all domestic workers questioning the constitutionality of the current employment set up for domestic workers.

They were challenging Section 27(4) of the Employment Act (2000) and Section 10 of the Pension Act (2023). Section 27(4) defines an employer as any person, body corporate, undertaking or body of persons who has at least five employees, setting the minimum threshold for employment protections. Section 10 of the Pension Act gives the minister power to exempt any class or category of employers and employees from the mandatory occupational pension scheme.

The domestic workers argued that the Employment Act discriminates against them because most households employing domestic workers have fewer than five employees and therefore fall outside the remit of the Act. They argued the provisions violate their constitutional rights to non-discrimination, social protection and fair labour practices.

Sitting as the Constitutional Court in Blantyre, the High Court ruled that the provisions are constitutional and do not violate the rights of domestic workers. The court stated that the inclusion of domestic workers in the exemption order made pursuant to Section 10 of the Pension Act does not impinge upon their rights.

The defendants, the Attorney General and the Registrar of Financial Services, had argued that the exclusions are justified under Section 44 of the Constitution on limitations of human rights and the court agreed.

Key facts

Court: High Court sitting as Constitutional Court, Blantyre

Claimants: Eliza Steven and Domestic and Vulnerable Workers Association

Judges: Jack N'riva, Chimwemwe Kamowa, Allan Muhome

Laws challenged: Section 27(4) Employment Act 2000 and Section 10 Pension Act 2023

Outcome: Application dismissed — provisions ruled constitutional

What happens next

One of the claimants’ lawyers, Steve Mponda, said the legal team will analyse the judgment before consulting their client on the next possible course of action, leaving open the possibility of an appeal. The case was certified as a constitutional matter by Chief Justice Rizine Mzikamanda in July last year.

Domestic workers, predominantly women, are among the most economically vulnerable workers in Malawi. Without formal employment contracts they have limited legal recourse when dismissed, underpaid or mistreated. Without pension contributions they have no guaranteed income in old age.