The Mzimba Heritage Association and the Maseko Ngoni Heritage Trust have challenged the Malawi Government’s position that the country has no kingdoms, saying the traditional institutions they represent predate the modern state. The two organisations issued a joint statement on Tuesday, September 8, 2026, a day after the Ministry of Local Government warned that attempts to establish or recognise kingdoms and kingships in Malawi are unlawful. The statement was issued on behalf of the traditional institutions associated with Inkosi ya Makhosi M’mbelwa V, leader of the Zwangendaba Jele Ngonis, and Inkosi ya Makhosi Gomani V, leader of the Maseko Ngonis. The Ngoni organisations said they recognise Malawi as a unitary republic governed by the 1994 Constitution. But they argue that this does not erase traditional institutions whose origins predate the establishment of the modern Malawian state. Constitutional argument At the centre of their response is customary law. The organisations cite Section 200 of the Constitution, arguing that customary law forms part of Malawi’s legal framework where it does not conflict with the Constitution or written law. They also refer to the Chiefs Act, saying entitlement to traditional offices is derived from applicable customary law. They therefore argue that the status of traditional institutions must be understood not only through modern government structures, but also through the history and customary laws of the communities concerned. A history that predates Malawi The Ngoni organisations say both the Maseko and Zwangendaba Jele political institutions were established in the 19th century, following migrations from southern Africa. The Maseko Ngoni established themselves in parts of present-day central and southern Malawi, while the Zwangendaba Jele Ngoni eventually established themselves in what is now Mzimba. Historical accounts also describe the establishment of the M’mbelwa Ngoni polity in northern Malawi during the 19th century. The organisations argue that these political institutions therefore existed before the creation of the modern Republic of Malawi. They further point to October 24, 1904, when Inkosi ya Makhosi M’mbelwa I is said to have entered into an agreement with British colonial authorities. They interpret the arrangement as evidence that the traditional institution was incorporated into colonial administration rather than abolished. What does “king” mean? They argue that the title reflects the customary position of a paramount traditional leader and does not amount to a claim of sovereign statehood. This distinction is important because the government’s September 7 statement focused on the creation or recognition of kingdoms as separate territorial authorities. Government said Malawi’s laws do not provide for the creation of kingdoms or for individuals to be given the title of king in a way that creates a separate territorial authority. The Ngoni organisations, however, say their position is about historical and customary recognition, not the creation of a state within the state. They cite other African monarchies The Ngoni statement also refers to traditional monarchies operating within constitutional republics elsewhere in Africa. It cites the Zulu monarchy in South Africa, Buganda in Uganda and the Ashanti institution in Ghana as examples of traditional leadership existing alongside republican governments. The organisations argue that traditional monarchies and republican constitutional systems can coexist without undermining national sovereignty. They reject unsupported claims The Ngoni organisations also make clear that they do not support every claim to kingship. They say claims to kingdoms or kingships that lack historical foundations or verifiable customary law should be rejected. Their objection, therefore, is directed at what they see as the treatment of established traditional institutions in the same way as newly created or unsupported claims. The exchange between government and the Ngoni organisations has opened a wider debate about the place of traditional authority in modern Malawi. There appears to be no dispute between the two sides that Malawi is a sovereign republic. The disagreement is over whether traditional institutions with historical claims to kingship can continue to describe themselves as kingdoms or their leaders as kings within that republic. For the Ngoni organisations, the answer is yes — provided such institutions are rooted in established history and customary law and do not claim constitutional sovereignty separate from the Malawi state. For government, the position announced on September 7 is that Malawi’s laws do not provide for the establishment or recognition of kingdoms and kingships as separate territorial authorities. The debate is therefore no longer simply about whether Malawi is a republic. It is about how far a modern republic should recognise the historical identities and customary institutions that existed before the republic itself. And the Ngoni organisations have made their position clear: The Republic of Malawi may be modern, but the traditional institutions they represent are older than the republic. Post navigation The Moti Deal: A Miracle for Malawi or a Billion-Dollar Debt Trap? Sosola Shrugs off “No kingdoms” — Appoints Chewa Chiefs Council.