When Frank Mbeta became Attorney General in October 2025, he inherited a legal battle that had remained without Government’s required defence submissions for nearly ten years, despite several opportunities for successive administrations to act.
Months later, the Supreme Court of Appeal rejected his attempt to file the missing arguments out of time, overturned an earlier High Court victory and exposed Government and the Reserve Bank of Malawi (RBM) to a liability estimated at nearly MK300 billion.
However, the history of the case shows that the procedural problems behind the defeat had accumulated long before Mbeta took office, raising questions about why Government failed to defend its position throughout the preceding years.
The dispute dates back to 2008, when the RBM and Ministry of Finance won a High Court case against Finance Bank over costs relating to the bank’s receivership. Finance Bank appealed in 2015, requiring both parties to submit arguments before the Supreme Court of Appeal.
While the Finance Bank liquidator’s lawyers filed their skeleton arguments in 2016, Government failed to submit its own. That omission continued across successive Attorneys General, including Dr Kalekeni Kaphale, Charles Mhango and Dr Chikosa Silungwe, with Kaphale serving during two separate periods.
Even after Thabo Chakaka Nyirenda assumed the office, the Supreme Court reportedly granted Government repeated extensions to submit its arguments. However, those opportunities passed without the required submissions being filed.
By the time Mbeta took office in October 2025, the appeal had been pending for roughly a decade without Government having filed its skeleton arguments. He therefore inherited a case in which the opportunity to defend the High Court victory had already been repeatedly missed.
Mbeta subsequently sought an extension and filed the missing arguments, attempting to regularise Government’s position despite the lengthy delay. However, the Supreme Court declined to admit the submissions because they were filed out of time.
On February 3, 2026, the Supreme Court of Appeal ruled in favour of the Finance Bank liquidator, overturned the High Court judgment and exposed Government and RBM to a potential liability estimated at nearly MK300 billion.
Although the judgment was delivered during Mbeta’s tenure, the timeline reveals that the failures affecting Government’s defence stretched across several years and multiple holders of the Attorney General’s office. His attempt to address the situation came after the case had already experienced years of procedural inaction.
The outcome raises a bigger accountability question: how did a case Government had won in the High Court go nearly ten years without the necessary submissions to defend that victory, despite repeated opportunities granted by the court?
For Mbeta, the Finance Bank appeal was a problem he inherited and attempted to address. The years preceding his appointment remain central to understanding how Government’s legal position deteriorated into a potential MK300 billion liability.
Months later, the Supreme Court of Appeal rejected his attempt to file the missing arguments out of time, overturned an earlier High Court victory and exposed Government and the Reserve Bank of Malawi (RBM) to a liability estimated at nearly MK300 billion.
However, the history of the case shows that the procedural problems behind the defeat had accumulated long before Mbeta took office, raising questions about why Government failed to defend its position throughout the preceding years.
The dispute dates back to 2008, when the RBM and Ministry of Finance won a High Court case against Finance Bank over costs relating to the bank’s receivership. Finance Bank appealed in 2015, requiring both parties to submit arguments before the Supreme Court of Appeal.
While the Finance Bank liquidator’s lawyers filed their skeleton arguments in 2016, Government failed to submit its own. That omission continued across successive Attorneys General, including Dr Kalekeni Kaphale, Charles Mhango and Dr Chikosa Silungwe, with Kaphale serving during two separate periods.
Even after Thabo Chakaka Nyirenda assumed the office, the Supreme Court reportedly granted Government repeated extensions to submit its arguments. However, those opportunities passed without the required submissions being filed.
By the time Mbeta took office in October 2025, the appeal had been pending for roughly a decade without Government having filed its skeleton arguments. He therefore inherited a case in which the opportunity to defend the High Court victory had already been repeatedly missed.
Mbeta subsequently sought an extension and filed the missing arguments, attempting to regularise Government’s position despite the lengthy delay. However, the Supreme Court declined to admit the submissions because they were filed out of time.
On February 3, 2026, the Supreme Court of Appeal ruled in favour of the Finance Bank liquidator, overturned the High Court judgment and exposed Government and RBM to a potential liability estimated at nearly MK300 billion.
Although the judgment was delivered during Mbeta’s tenure, the timeline reveals that the failures affecting Government’s defence stretched across several years and multiple holders of the Attorney General’s office. His attempt to address the situation came after the case had already experienced years of procedural inaction.
The outcome raises a bigger accountability question: how did a case Government had won in the High Court go nearly ten years without the necessary submissions to defend that victory, despite repeated opportunities granted by the court?
For Mbeta, the Finance Bank appeal was a problem he inherited and attempted to address. The years preceding his appointment remain central to understanding how Government’s legal position deteriorated into a potential MK300 billion liability.
