The ongoing debate over President Arthur Peter Mutharika’s age and fitness to govern has drawn comments from governance expert George Chaima and the National Advocacy Platform (NAP), with both questioning the basis for treating age alone as a threat to the President’s ability to lead.
The debate has intensified following calls from some sections of society for greater scrutiny of Mutharika’s physical and mental fitness, with some stakeholders also demanding medical disclosures and parliamentary oversight.
Chaima says the focus should be on whether Mutharika is actually capable of performing his presidential duties rather than his age.
He points to the President’s public appearances, communication and physical activity as indications that he remains capable of discharging his responsibilities.
“He is able to speak fluently, clearly, and also with wisdom. So a man does not fail to govern the country when he is able to speak or respond to any question and also do physical work,” Chaima said.
According to Chaima, the debate surrounding Mutharika’s age and fitness is being deliberately fuelled by some sections of society who are interested in succession issues.
He says age should not automatically be equated with incapacity, adding that even illness does not necessarily make a person unfit to lead unless its extent affects the ability to govern.
“Even if the President was sick, being sick is normal for a physical person, whether young or old, we all get sick, but it is the extent of sickness that surrounds the leadership that would determine his fitness to govern,” he said.
Chaima maintains that, based on Mutharika’s current public engagements and ability to perform his duties, there is no clear basis to conclude that he is unfit to govern.”But as of now, we can clearly see that President Mutharika is fit enough physically to govern the country,” he said.
Against this backdrop, NAP Chairperson Benedicto Kondowe says concerns over Mutharika’s age cannot invalidate the mandate Malawians gave him through the September 16, 2025 election.
“The concerns being raised about the age of His Excellency President Mutharika, however genuine they may appear, cannot invalidate a constitutional mandate that was freely given by Malawians at the polls,” Kondowe said.
NAP says stakeholders should instead focus on governance, accountability and delivery of the commitments made during the 2025 election, while any genuine concerns about presidential incapacity should be addressed through established constitutional processes.
The positions have therefore shifted the debate beyond Mutharika’s age to a broader question of how Malawi can balance public scrutiny of elected leaders with respect for the electoral mandate and constitutional processes governing presidential tenure.
