Govt persistent crisis management challenges: Lessons from the Bingu and Chilima’s Chilima inquiries

The deaths of President Bingu wa Mutharika in 2012 and Vice President Saulos Chilima in 2024 were defining moments in Malawi’s history, each exposing systemic weaknesses in the nation’s crisis management framework. These tragedies, while different in their nature, highlighted recurring issues in communication, institutional coordination, reliance on external assistance, and implementation of reforms. A critical analysis of these events reveals the need for Malawi to rethink its approach to managing crises involving public figures.

Delayed and Opaque Communication

In both crises, the government struggled to communicate effectively and promptly, leaving a vacuum filled with speculation and misinformation.

• Bingu wa Mutharika’s Death: On April 5, 2012, Bingu collapsed at State House and was rushed to Kamuzu Central Hospital (KCH). Hours passed without an official statement, despite the visible presence of high-profile officials at the hospital and mounting rumors. It wasn’t until days later that the government confirmed his death. This delay allowed private and international media to dominate the narrative, undermining public trust.
• Saulos Chilima’s Plane Crash: A similar pattern emerged when the Vice President’s plane went missing on June 10, 2024. The government’s initial response lacked clarity, and updates on search and rescue efforts were slow and inconsistent. By the time the wreckage was found, the public was already questioning the government’s ability to manage the situation effectively.

The lack of a robust crisis communication strategy in both cases fueled uncertainty, diminished confidence in leadership, and highlighted the importance of timely and transparent public engagement during national emergencies.

Inadequate Institutional Coordination

Both inquiries revealed significant challenges in how government institutions coordinated their efforts during crises, despite the involvement of multiple agencies.

• Handling of Bingu’s Death: Reports from the Commission highlighted the disorganized approach to managing the President’s collapse and subsequent transportation to South Africa. Confusion over the time and circumstances of his death further emphasized the lack of a coherent response plan.
• Response to the Plane Crash: The inquiry into the crash pointed to similar issues. While the Malawi Defence Force, Civil Aviation Authority, and other agencies were mobilized, their efforts lacked synchronization. The delay in search and rescue operations and unclear delegation of responsibilities highlighted a failure in operational coordination.

These cases underscore the need for well-defined protocols and inter-agency collaboration to ensure a unified response during crises.

Dependence on External Assistance

Both tragedies exposed Malawi’s overreliance on international assistance to manage critical aspects of the crises.

• Bingu wa Mutharika: After his death, South African medical teams were instrumental in performing the postmortem and embalming his body. The need for external expertise revealed gaps in Malawi’s capacity to handle high-profile medical emergencies.
• Saulos Chilima: Following the plane crash, the German Federal Bureau of Aircraft Accident Investigation played a significant role in determining the cause of the accident. This reliance on external entities highlighted the limitations of local aviation safety and investigative capabilities.

While international support can be valuable, the repeated reliance on it signals an urgent need for Malawi to build its internal resources and expertise.

Recurring Recommendations, Limited Action

Both inquiries resulted in detailed recommendations aimed at addressing the shortcomings revealed by these crises. However, the recurrence of similar issues in subsequent years points to limited implementation of these suggestions.

• Post-Bingu Recommendations: The Commission advised the establishment of dedicated medical facilities for high-ranking officials, improved communication protocols, and a review of constitutional processes for power transitions. These recommendations, however, saw little follow-through, leaving gaps that were exposed again during the Chilima plane crash.
• Post-Chilima Recommendations: The inquiry into the crash reiterated the need for improved emergency response mechanisms and aviation safety protocols. Despite these echoes of past recommendations, the systemic failures highlighted suggest a lack of political will to enact meaningful reforms.

This repeated cycle of identifying issues without acting on them not only perpetuates vulnerabilities but also diminishes public trust in government accountability.

The Role of Media and Public Perception

In both cases, the media played a crucial role in shaping public perception. However, the government’s inability to effectively manage narratives contributed to widespread misinformation and heightened public frustration.

• Bingu’s Death: Private media outlets provided real-time updates that often conflicted with official statements, reflecting the government’s slow response. International media broke the news of his death before Malawi’s state broadcaster, compounding the perception of disarray.
• Chilima’s Crash: Similarly, the delayed and fragmented government communication allowed speculation to dominate, with media coverage focusing on perceived incompetence in the search and rescue efforts.

A proactive and transparent media strategy could have mitigated these challenges, ensuring accurate information reached the public in a timely manner.

The Way Forward

The lessons from these two crises are clear: Malawi’s crisis management systems are hampered by poor communication, weak institutional coordination, and an overreliance on external assistance. Implementing past recommendations, investing in local capabilities, and establishing robust protocols are essential steps to ensure the country is better prepared for future emergencies.

Public figures, regardless of their role, deserve dignified handling of their crises, and the nation deserves leadership that can respond decisively. These tragedies must not be remembered solely for their loss but as catalysts for meaningful change. Only by addressing these systemic weaknesses can Malawi move forward with a renewed sense of resilience and accountability.

Sharing is caring!