๐—ฆ๐˜‚๐—ฝ๐—ฟ๐—ฒ๐—บ๐—ฒ ๐—–๐—ผ๐˜‚๐—ฟ๐˜ ๐——๐—ถ๐˜€๐—บ๐—ถ๐˜€๐˜€๐—ฒ๐˜€ ๐—ž๐—ฎ๐—บ๐˜„๐—ฎ๐—ป๐—ฎ ๐—–๐—ต๐—ถ๐—ฒ๐—ณ๐˜๐—ฎ๐—ถ๐—ป๐—ฐ๐˜† ๐—”๐—ฝ๐—ฝ๐—ฒ๐—ฎ๐—น, ๐—ข๐—ฟ๐—ฑ๐—ฒ๐˜€ ๐—ง/๐—” ๐——๐˜‡๐—ผ๐—ผ๐—น๐—ฒ ๐˜๐—ผ ๐—”๐—ฝ๐—ฝ๐—ผ๐—ถ๐—ป๐˜ ๐—ก๐—ฒ๐˜„ ๐—ฉ๐—ถ๐—น๐—น๐—ฎ๐—ด๐—ฒ ๐—›๐—ฒ๐—ฎ๐—ฑ

๐— ๐—ฆ๐—–๐—” ๐—–๐—ถ๐˜ƒ๐—ถ๐—น ๐—”๐—ฝ๐—ฝ๐—ฒ๐—ฎ๐—น ๐—ก๐—ผ. ๐Ÿญ๐Ÿฒ ๐—ผ๐—ณ ๐Ÿฎ๐Ÿฌ๐Ÿฎ๐Ÿฏ


๐—๐—ฎ๐—บ๐—ฒ๐˜€ ๐—–๐—ต๐—ถ๐—น๐—ผ๐—ป๐—ฑ๐—ผ๐—น๐—ฎ ๐—ฆ๐—ฎ๐—ป๐—ด๐—ฎ๐—น๐—ฎ (๐—”๐—ฑ๐—บ๐—ถ๐—ป๐—ถ๐˜€๐˜๐—ฟ๐—ฎ๐˜๐—ผ๐—ฟ ๐—ผ๐—ณ ๐˜๐—ต๐—ฒ ๐—˜๐˜€๐˜๐—ฎ๐˜๐—ฒ ๐—ผ๐—ณ ๐—ง๐—ฒ๐—ฏ๐˜‚๐—น๐—ผ ๐—ฆ๐—ฎ๐—ป๐—ด๐—ฎ๐—น๐—ฎ (๐——๐—ฒ๐—ฐ๐—ฒ๐—ฎ๐˜€๐—ฒ๐—ฑ)
๐—”๐—ป๐—ฑ
๐—•๐—ผ๐—น๐—ถ๐—ป๐—ด๐—ผ ๐——๐˜‡๐—ถ๐—บ๐—ฏ๐—ถ๐—ฟ๐—ถ (๐Ÿญ๐˜€๐˜ ๐—ฅ๐—ฒ๐˜€๐—ฝ๐—ผ๐—ป๐—ฑ๐—ฒ๐—ป๐˜)
๐—ง๐—ต๐—ฒ ๐——๐—ถ๐˜€๐˜๐—ฟ๐—ถ๐—ฐ๐˜ ๐—–๐—ผ๐—บ๐—บ๐—ถ๐˜€๐˜€๐—ถ๐—ผ๐—ป๐—ฒ๐—ฟ (๐Ÿฎ๐—ป๐—ฑ ๐—ฅ๐—ฒ๐˜€๐—ฝ๐—ผ๐—ป๐—ฑ๐—ฒ๐—ป๐˜)

The Supreme Court of Appeal sitting in Mzuzu has dismissed an appeal in the Kamwana chieftaincy dispute, ruling that the matter must now be resolved by Traditional Authority (T/A) Dzoole of Dowa district, as provided for under Section 9 of the Chiefs Act.

The appeal was filed on several grounds, including that the High Court wrongly relied on a forged and later-withdrawn affidavit that had been attributed to Senior Chief Dzoole in support of the first respondent's claim to the Kamwana throne. The appellant argued that the High Court failed to consider authentic, uncontested evidence supporting his claim and wrongly considered instructions from the Secretary for Local Government on a chiefโ€™s stipend that were later revoked. He also challenged the costs order against him as a legally aided litigant.

The appellant had sought to be declared the rightful heir to the Kamwana throne, an order compelling the authorities to recognise him as Village Headman Kamwana, and a permanent injunction barring interference in his duties. He further requested that he not be condemned to pay legal costs.

However, the Supreme Court found that the appeal served only the interests of Mr. Tebulo Sangala, who is now deceased as he commenced the matter on his own behalf and not on behalf of the royal family where he comes from. The court found that the power to appoint a village Headman reverts to TA Dzoole. The Court ordered that T/A Dzoole make the appointment โ€œas soon as possibleโ€ and stated that the previously granted stay order remains in effect until the new appointment is made. Both parties were ordered to bear their own legal costs.

The matter, heard and determined on 10 July 2025, was presided over by a full bench of the Malawi Supreme Court of Appeal, consisting of His Lordship the Honourable Chief Justice Rizine Robert Mzikamanda, SC, His Lordship the Honourable Deputy Chief Justice Lovemore Chikopa, SC, and Honourable Justices of Appeal Frank Kapanda, SC, Healey Potani, SC, John Katsala, SC, Charles Mkandawire, SC, Sylvester Kalembera, SC, Rowland Mbvundula, SC, and Ivy nyaKaunda Kamanga, SC.

Add new comment

Restricted HTML

  • Allowed HTML tags: <a href hreflang> <em> <strong> <cite> <blockquote cite> <code> <ul type> <ol start type> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd> <h2 id> <h3 id> <h4 id> <h5 id> <h6 id>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Web page addresses and email addresses turn into links automatically.