Recent debates around Malawi’s anti-begging law have raised an important question: Should poverty be managed through punishment, or through protection?
While concerns about public order, exploitation, and safety are legitimate, many of us may agree that begging is often not a crime of intent, but a symptom of vulnerability — hunger, disability, homelessness, illness, abandonment, or lack of opportunity.
That is why perhaps it is time to think beyond the courtroom and consider a more humane, practical alternative:
A City Vulnerable Persons Support Fund
Rather than responding to begging primarily through criminal law, Malawi’s cities could establish social protection funds to support those genuinely unable to sustain themselves, while helping others transition out of street dependence.
This would not simply be charity.
It would be organised compassion with accountability.
The Core Idea
Each city — whether Lilongwe, Blantyre, Mzuzu or Zomba — could establish a Vulnerable Persons Support Fund, supported through partnerships among:
City councils
Faith communities
Businesses through corporate social responsibility
Individual well-wishers
Diaspora contributions
NGOs and development partners
Imagine a transparent public fund where citizens can contribute through mobile money, institutions can sponsor support programs, and assistance reaches vulnerable people through a structured system rather than informal street giving alone.
Who Would It Support?
Priority support could go to:
Elderly persons without family support
Persons living with disabilities
Chronically ill and labour-constrained individuals
Homeless vulnerable adults
Street-connected children through protection and reintegration
People facing temporary destitution due to crisis
This recognizes a simple truth:
Some people are not refusing to work — they simply cannot cope without support.
Beyond Handouts: Pathways to Dignity
Support should go beyond occasional alms.
The fund could provide:
Emergency food assistance
Shelter support
Small cash transfers in verified cases
Medical and social welfare referrals
Skills and livelihood support
Reintegration assistance for those able to rebuild independence
The goal should not be dependency.
The goal should be dignity.
A Better Role for Well-Wishers
Many citizens want to help, but informal giving at intersections or streets often reaches people unevenly and can sometimes sustain exploitative systems.
What if generosity was organised?
Instead of random giving, well-wishers could contribute into a trusted city mechanism that:
Pools support
Reaches more people
Targets genuine need
Reduces abuse
Builds long-term solutions
That could turn private compassion into public impact.
Transparency Must Be Central
For such a fund to work, trust is everything. It should be governed by a board including:
City authorities
Social welfare officials
Faith representatives
Civil society
Disability advocates
Private sector partners
Independent auditors
And it should publish regular public reports on:
Funds received
Funds used
Beneficiaries supported
Administrative costs
Independent audits
If citizens can see where their contributions go, support can grow.
Rethinking the Begging Debate
Perhaps the debate should not be:
“Should begging be criminalised or allowed?”
Perhaps it should be:
How do we reduce street begging while protecting vulnerable people?
That is a better policy question. One can discourage exploitative or aggressive begging while also refusing to criminalise desperation. Those two things can coexist.
From Prohibition to Compassionate Policy
A powerful model could be:
Identify → Assess → Support → Reintegrate
Not merely:
Arrest → Prosecute → Repeat
Because punishment may remove people from the street for a day. Support can help remove the conditions that put them there.
A National Conversation Worth Having
Malawi has a strong tradition of community solidarity.
This proposal simply imagines extending that spirit into city-level social protection. Not just charity. Not just law enforcement. But structured compassion.
And perhaps that is the bigger opportunity hidden in this debate:
To move from managing poverty to reducing vulnerability.
To move from criminalising begging to organising compassion.
And to show that public order and human dignity do not have to be enemies.
