Speaker Suleman faces conflict of interest questions over Eastbridge fertiliser deal as opposition demands answers

Parliament is facing renewed controversy after allegations emerged that Speaker Sameer Suleman may have had a conflict of interest in matters linked to a failed fertiliser-for-tobacco deal involving Eastbridge, a company formerly headed in Malawi by his son.

The claims have intensified scrutiny of the Speaker amid reports that he allegedly encouraged tobacco buyers to stay away from Government-owned tobacco stocks while at the same time declaring a commercial interest in the matter.

The dispute stems from a collapsed agreement between Eastbridge and the previous administration under which the company was expected to supply fertiliser in exchange for tobacco and other agricultural commodities.

After Eastbridge failed to fulfil its obligations, the current Government terminated the arrangement, triggering a legal battle.

Eastbridge subsequently laid claim to tobacco purchased through the Smallholder Farmers Fertilizer Revolving Fund.

However, the courts ruled in favour of the Government, rejecting the company’s claim to the crop.

The matter has attracted further attention because the Speaker’s son, Tahir Suleman, was serving as Chief Executive Officer of Eastbridge Malawi during the dispute.

He resigned from the company on 20 July 2026, shortly after the court ruling.

Questions have also been raised about the Speaker’s involvement in discussions relating to the disposal of the tobacco stockpile.

According to Government sources, officials approached alternative tobacco buyers after the court decision, but concerns emerged when communications reportedly suggested that Mr Suleman had urged some firms not to participate while indicating that he had a personal commercial interest.

The allegations have prompted sharp reaction from opposition lawmakers, who say the matter warrants full public scrutiny.

“The Speaker occupies one of the highest offices in the country and must be held to the highest standards of transparency and accountability,” said one opposition MP.

Another opposition legislator said the allegations had raised “serious questions that cannot simply be brushed aside”.

“Where there is even a perception of a conflict of interest, Parliament has a duty to establish the facts. Public confidence in the institution is at stake,” the MP said.

A third opposition lawmaker called for an independent review of the matter.

“This is not about personalities. It is about protecting public institutions and ensuring that official powers are exercised in the public interest,” the MP said.

Critics have also questioned recent calls for ad hoc parliamentary committees, arguing that any parliamentary process linked to the dispute must be demonstrably free from personal or commercial interests.

“These are serious questions of conflict of interest,” another opposition figure said. “There are concerns about whether parliamentary processes are being used in connection with a private business dispute.”

The controversy comes at a time when Parliament is already facing wider governance debates, adding further pressure on the Speaker to respond to the allegations.

Mr Suleman’s office had not commented on the claims at the time of publication.

Follow and Subscribe Nyasa TV :