I recently stumbled upon a viral video featuring a Road Traffic and Safety Services Directorate (RTSSD) Officer. In this cinematic masterpiece, the Officer charges a self-proclaimed tourist a whopping $1000 for a traffic offense. The tourist, clearly auditioning for a role in International Outrage: The Sequel, cries foul—“Extortion! Corruption! Malawi is the most corrupt country!” Cue dramatic music.
And just like that, the Malawian jury of social media convenes. No need for evidence. No need for context. The Officer is corrupt. Unreasonable. A national disgrace. Verdict passed. Sentence: public crucifixion via comment section.
But hold on, dear keyboard judges—have you read the Road Traffic Act? Or the Road Traffic (Prescribed Offences and Penalties) (Amendment) Regulations of 2014, 2017, or 2019? No? Thought so.
Let me help you out. All three amendments include clauses on “violation of international traffic laws” and “weighbridge offenses”—and guess what? They’re pegged to the almighty dollar. In the 2014 Regulations, check out Regulations 135 and 136. For the 2017 and 2019 versions, peek at Regulations 137 and 138. So before you crucify the Officer like the Pharisees did Jesus, maybe—just maybe—read the law.
But I digress. That wasn’t even the point of my writing.
Let’s talk about the real gem: Regulation 139. Introduced in 2017 and 2019, it covers “Driving under the influence of intoxicating liquor or drugs.” Now, I keep hearing about this MWK200,000 fine. It’s practically folklore. Everyone caught seems to pay it. You’d think it’s the only band that exists.
But Regulation 139 actually has tiers: MWK30,000, MWK60,000, MWK80,000, MWK100,000… and then the infamous MWK200,000. And here’s the kicker—at that top tier, it’s either pay up or face 3 years in prison and a one-year driving suspension.
Yet no one’s ever imprisoned. No one’s ever suspended. Just a smooth MWK200,000 transaction and off they go. You must be rich. Or maybe we’ve turned Regulation 139 into a VIP club—entry fee MWK200,000, no questions asked.
So I ask: is this justice, or just convenience dressed in legal robes?
The Bonet Framework 