By Staff Contributor
When CAMA Executive Director John Kapito stood before the media this week and mocked Austin Mkoka with the words “zigamba zili phwee” while praying that “the demon” in him should leave, many Malawians were left asking one simple question: who gave him the moral high ground?
It is ironic that the man who has positioned himself as Malawi’s self-appointed conscience on governance and consumer rights chose insults about a person’s appearance to make a political point.
If someone turned the mirror on Kapito and commented on his health, his age, or his personal life in public, how would he feel? Would he call it respect for debate, or would he cry foul and demand civility?
Leadership demands consistency. You cannot demand dignity for public debate and then strip it from others the moment you disagree.
Beyond the tone, the bigger question is about CAMA itself.
The Consumers Association of Malawi was formed to protect ordinary Malawians from exploitation, high prices, poor services, and abuse by both government and business.
But after decades under the same leadership, one must ask: is there democracy inside CAMA? Is John Kapito a life president? And if so, why does he cling to the association as if it were personal property?
Institutions gain credibility when they practice internally what they preach externally.
If CAMA cannot hold its own internal elections, rotate leadership, and allow fresh voices, then how can it credibly demand accountability from Parliament, government, or corporations?
Malawians deserve to know who sits on CAMA’s board, how decisions are made, how funds are raised and spent, and whether members have a real say.
The timing of Kapito’s outrage also raises questions.
Where was this loud voice when Malawians were marching, suffering fuel shortages, electricity blackouts, and rising cost of living during the Chakwera and MCP administration?
Where were the nationwide consumer campaigns, the court interventions, the bold pressers that matched the ones we see now? Selective activism weakens trust.
Consumers need a body that speaks every day, not only when political temperatures rise.
We must also ask: what has CAMA concretely delivered for Malawians in the last 10 years? How many exploitative companies has it successfully taken to court and won for consumers? How many price reductions has it negotiated?
How many communities has it educated on their rights to safe fuel, electricity, and basic goods? Without clear, measurable impact, CAMA risks being reduced to press statements and personal opinions.
That is not to say corruption should not be investigated.
The Speaker’s move to establish 12 committees deserves scrutiny on its merits, and so does any injunction that seeks to block it.
But the messenger matters. If CAMA wants to remain Malawi’s voice on consumer issues, it must first reform itself.
It must open up, hold elections, publish audited reports, and build a team beyond one personality.
Right now, too many Malawians see CAMA as “Kapito and CAMA” instead of “CAMA for Malawians.” That is dangerous. Consumer protection is bigger than one man.
It is about mothers in markets, minibus passengers, tenants, and workers who need an institution that will fight for them consistently, not an association that appears and disappears with political cycles.
Kapito is entitled to his views. But if he wants to lecture others about demons, integrity, and public interest, he must first exorcise the culture of one-man rule, selective outrage, and zero accountability from the house he leads.
Until then, Malawians will keep asking: whose interests is CAMA really serving?
