EPISODE 5 (2026): WHAT DID THE PRESIDENTIAL COMMISSION OF INQUIRY DO AFTER REJECTING THE AUTOPSY FINDINGS?
After rejecting the findings of the autopsy report by Dr Charles Dzamalala, which identified head injuries and bleeding inside the skull as the cause of Evison Matafale’s death, the Presidential Commission of Inquiry pursued a different line of investigation to arrive at its own determination of the cause of death.
According to the Commission’s report, it relied on the following:
- Two medical specialists
The Commission engaged Prof. George Liomba, then a Consultant Pathologist and Head of the Department of Pathology at the College of Medicine, and Dr Sam Kampondeni, a Consultant Radiologist.
The two specialists were tasked with interpreting the autopsy report, alongside clinical notes from health facilities where Evison Matafale received medical treatment.
- Technician who participated in the autopsy
The Commission also relied on the testimony of Ms Maggie Moyo, who was then Chief Technician in the Anatomy Department at the College of Medicine and had participated in the autopsy examination led by Dr Charles Dzamalala.
She presented her observations concerning the internal condition of Evison Matafale’s skull during the post-mortem examination. According to the Commission, some of her observations contradicted the account given by Dr Charles Dzamalala.
- Questioning the validity of the autopsy report
Having considered the evidence and submissions from Prof. George Liomba, Dr Sam Kampondeni and Ms Maggie Moyo, the Commission stated that it “seriously doubted the validity of the autopsy report by Dr Charles Dzamalala.”
The Commission raised two key criticisms of the autopsy report:
a. It described the autopsy report as exaggerated.
b. It argued that the conclusions and arguments presented in the report did not “conform to normal pathological and clinical expectations”.
- Recalling Dr Charles Dzamalala for further questioning
The Commission further reported that it had invited Dr Charles Dzamalala to appear before it again to respond to questions arising from the evidence presented by Professor George Liomba, Dr Sam Kampondeni and Ms Maggie Moyo.
According to the Commission’s report, Dr Charles Dzamalala declined to make himself available for this further questioning. (NB: The second summons and his response declining are not attached to the inquiry report).
The Presidential Commission of Inquiry Report does not disclose what further measures were considered or taken to secure his attendance, or whether the Commission invoked any relevant powers available to it under the Presidential Commissions Act.
Finally, given the seriousness of the Commission’s allegation that the autopsy report did not conform to accepted pathological and clinical standards, the Presidential Commission’s report does not indicate whether the matter was referred to the Medical Council of Malawi for further investigation into Dr Charles Dzamalala’s professional conduct.
WHAT DID THE PRESIDENTIAL COMMISSION ULTIMATELY CONCLUDE WAS THE ACTUAL CAUSE OF DEATH?
Find out in the next episode as LHF continues its critical examination of the two inquiry reports into the death of Evison Matafale.