The High Court Civil Division in Blantyre yesterday granted an interlocutory injunction in favour of Attorney General (AG) Honourable Frank Mbeta, restraining ten defendants from occupying or carrying out construction activities on a disputed farm in Area 45, Lilongwe District.
The order prohibits the defendants, their agents or associates from continuing with any occupation, building works, or other activities on the 20.24-hectare property until ownership of the land is determined or further direction is given by the court.
The claim was filed by the AG’s Chambers on behalf of the African Union – Centre for Ticks and Tick-Borne Diseases (AU-CTTBD), which asserts legitimate possession of the farm situated in Area 45, Lilongwe, just past the Likuni Roundabout and before the Bwemba Police Roadblock on the left.
In a sworn statement, the Vaccine Production Officer of AU-CTTBD, Osbert Pangani, said the land is critical to regional livestock health programmes, serving as a facility for cattle quarantine, vaccine production, and agricultural feed cultivation. According to his statement, the farm houses paddocks, stables, and holding facilities for up to 300 cattle. It is used to produce the East Coast Fever vaccine, distributed to farmers across Eastern and Central Southern Africa.
“In November 2025, the defendants unlawfully entered the farm and began activities inconsistent with our operations. These included offloading bricks from a truck on November 13, 2025, grading access roads with heavy machinery on November 18, 2025, and frequent vehicle movements linked to the defendants,” he stated.
The AU-CTTBD argued that the defendants’ actions amounted to trespass and unlawful interference with property rights, posing serious risks to biosecurity and ongoing scientific research. The presence of unauthorised individuals, it warned, could compromise quarantine protocols for imported cattle and threaten the integrity of internationally commissioned projects.
The court was told that the grading of roads and dumping of materials had already caused permanent alterations to the land. The claimant maintained that damages would be inadequate to remedy the harm, which includes threats to public health, food security, and scientific research.
Justice weighed the balance of convenience in favour of the AG, noting that the defendants had no lawful right to occupy the land. The injunction restores the status quo and prevents further interference until the matter is fully resolved.
- 7 views