Cry, Our Beloved Namibia
WHAT HAPPENED to prime minister Hage Geingob who, in 1998, led a national conference on ethics and corruption that generated great plans for good governance in Namibia? It surely cannot be that Geingob's promotion to president has translated into backward steps.
Hage Geingob, the president of the Republic of Namibia, appears to be a far cry from prime minister Hage Geingob of the 1990s.
At the beginning of this year, president Geingob announced during his official new year's message that 2020 would be 'the year of introspection'.
His declaration followed revelations of grand government-led corruption that the fishing industry was financing Swapo's factional battles and lining the pockets of cronies.
With five months left in 2020, the first signs of introspection came last week when Geingob led a Swapo 'post-mortem'. That was hardly encouraging. The meeting was actually a clear sign that Geingob and his government are only concerned that Swapo could lose government power. They see no need to fix the broken ethical and moral fibre of Namibia.
The introspection announced by the head of state should have been, by definition, a national process. And to be clear, it should be a process as opposed to an event.
President Geingob can consult prime minister Geingob for the 1998 blueprint of a nationwide consultative process aimed at building systems and institutions to nurture societal ethics and integrity.
At the beginning of 1998, prime minister Geingob tasked secretary to Cabinet Isaac Kaulinge to set up technical teams comprising the ombudsman, auditor general, prosecutor general, and non-governmental role players (including trade unions, business sector and civic organisations) to plan for a national conference later that year.
The technical teams crisscrossed Namibia, talking to members of the public as well as gathering information through research and surveys.
The 1998 national conference on the promotion of ethics and combating of corruption made far-reaching recommendations for good governance: A code of ethical conduct for all political appointees and government employees; public disclosure of assets and any conflicting interests; ethical studies to be included in the school curriculum; institutions for the public role of civil society in the fight against corruption; and strengthening the auditor general, ombudsman and prosecutor general.
The establishment of what became the Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC) was also decided there, but bolstered with guarantees for independence from the governing executives.
The ACC was to recruit its own staff, for example. So, it is baffling to hear current ACC director Paulus Noa not only welcome a career spy as chief executive but saying there was nothing wrong with the government of the day appointing top ACC employees like him and his managers. Only a stooge or an ignorant person can welcome such blatant government installations in an organisation set up to eliminate corruption out of the same government.
Anyway, Geingob's 1998 conference argued for an anti-corruption agency that would be accountable only to parliament.
It is thus concerning to see Geingob presiding over much-weakened watchdog institutions despite claiming he was building accountability and good governance for Namibia.
A month ago, defence minister Hafeni Vilho demonstrated the disdain politicians and bureaucrats have for accountability when he blasted the auditor general for publishing the abuse of taxpayer resources in the military. For instance, the auditor general highlighted how the ministry was paying a salary and subsistence allowances to a ghost (non-existent) military attaché in the Democratic Republic of Congo.
Expect no one at the defence ministry to pay back the stolen public funds or even go through any transparent disciplinary process.
Such are the depths Namibia has sunken to since the 1990s when prime minister Geingob was in denial arguing that corruption was “not a serious problem”, but at least took steps to start cleaning house.
Now, Namibia seems to have gone to the dogs with a government that is not even willing to go through a concerted nationwide process of introspection –– like an alcoholic yet to admit addiction.
Such is the despair at the government's attitude that one can only borrow from Alan Paton's novel and say: Cry, the beloved country.
South West Africa People’s Organisation (SWAPO)
https://www.sahistory.org.za/article/south-west-africa-peoples-organisation-swapo
SWAPO flag
The South West African People's Organisation (SWAPO) was founded in Windhoek, South West Africa (presently Namibia) on 19 April 1960 by Herman Toivo ja Toivo. The party was originally formed to advocated immediate Namibian independence from South Africa and became the country’s leading party following independence in 1990.
The SWA territory was entrusted by the League of Nations to South Africa under an administrative mandate after the First World War. After the Second World War, South Africa extended its apartheid policies to this territory and became a military occupier. After South Africa refused a United Nations order to withdraw from the trust territory in 1966, SWAPO turned to armed struggle.
SWAPO emerged as the sole liberation movement in the early 1960s because it had the support of the Ovambo, the largest ethnic group in Namibia. More a military organisation than a political one, SWAPO launched military operations against the South African government’s military positions. On 26 August 1966 the first major clash of the conflict took place, when a unit of the South African Police, supported by South African Air Force, exchanged fire with SWAPO forces. This date is generally regarded as the start of what became known in South Africa as the Border War.
Initially SWAPO suffered heavy losses against the South African Army but later SWAPO was backed by the Angolan ruling party, Popular Movement for the Liberation of Angola, the Soviet Union, the Norwegian government and the African National Congress. SWAPO used Angola as a base for guerrilla warfare on Namibian soil; operations were carried out by SWAPO’s guerrilla force, the People’s Liberation Army of Namibia (PLAN). Beginning in 1978 South Africa made periodic retaliatory land and air strikes into Angola. Herman Toivo ja Toivo, the founder of SWAPO, was imprisoned in South Africa for a 20-year term in 1968 but was released in 1984. Nujoma returned to Namibia in September 1989.
In 1978 the UN recognized SWAPO as the sole representative of the people of Namibia. Both SWAPO and South Africa agreed to a UN plan for a cease-fire, withdrawal of South African troops, and free elections to be guaranteed by UN security forces. After years of diplomatic maneuvering, South Africa finally accepted a UN resolution to that effect in December 1988. Sporadic fighting continued. In 1989 Nujoma was elected president and SWAPO won a majority of the delegates selected by the country’s voters to write a constitution for an independent Namibia. The following year a new constitution was adopted and Nujoma took office and in the same year South Africa completely withdrew unconditionally from Namibia.
SWAPO continued to dominate the political scene into the 21st century, transforming itself from a liberation movement into a governing party. SWAPO won the first and second election five years later. During its second term in office, the SWAPO dominated parliament and amended the constitution to allow their long term leader and now president of Namibia, Sam Nujoma, a third term in office. The constitutional amendment raised fears that this compromised Namibia’s democracy. The party won 75.1% of popular votes and 55 out of 78 seats in the parliamentary election held on 15 November 2004.
Controversy within the movement
Various groups have claimed that SWAPO committed serious human rights abuses against suspected spies during the Independence struggle (esp during the period of exile). The most serious of these was the detainee issue, which remains a divisive issue. Another issue was the Breaking the Wall of Silence (BWS), which was founded by those detainees to press the SWAPO-government on the issue of human rights abuses. SWAPO denies serious infractions and claims anything that did happen was in the name of liberation. The stories of the detainees begin with a series of successful South African raids that made the SWAPO leadership believe that they were spies in the movement. Hundreds of SWAPO cadres were imprisoned, tortured and interrogated.
References
Wallis, F. (2000). Nuusdagboek: feite en fratse oor 1000 jaar, Kaapstad: Human & Rousseau.|Encyclopedia Britannica Online (2009), ‘South West Africa People’s Organization’, available at: britannica.com [accessed 14 April 2009] |SWAPO [online], available at: wikipedia.org [accessed 14 April 2009]|Angola and South West Africa: A Forgotten War (1975-89) ”“ article published by geocities.com
Sources in Our Archive
The South West Commentator, Vol 2 No 3, February 1962
The South West Commentator,Vol 2 No 4, 28 March 1962
The South West Commentator, Vol 2 No 5, 16 May 1962
Namibia is showing wear and tear after 30 years under SWAPO rule
Interview with Oliver Tambo by Mayibuye,1 September 1981
Official Organ of the National Liberation Front,Vol 1.No 2, April 1963
Official Organ of the National Liberation Front, Vol 1.No 3, May 1963
Yu Chi Chan Club Pamphlet No. IV - Secret Communication by Allison Drew
National Liberation Front - Revolution in Latin America
South West Africa People’s Organisation (SWAPO) Report
Collections in the Archives
South West Africa People’s Organisation (SWAPO)
Nelson Rolihlahla Mandela
Opinions - Editorials | 2020-07-31
WHAT HAPPENED to prime minister Hage Geingob who, in 1998, led a national conference on ethics and corruption that generated great plans for good governance in Namibia? It surely cannot be that Geingob's promotion to president has translated into backward steps.
Hage Geingob, the president of the Republic of Namibia, appears to be a far cry from prime minister Hage Geingob of the 1990s.
At the beginning of this year, president Geingob announced during his official new year's message that 2020 would be 'the year of introspection'.
His declaration followed revelations of grand government-led corruption that the fishing industry was financing Swapo's factional battles and lining the pockets of cronies.
With five months left in 2020, the first signs of introspection came last week when Geingob led a Swapo 'post-mortem'. That was hardly encouraging. The meeting was actually a clear sign that Geingob and his government are only concerned that Swapo could lose government power. They see no need to fix the broken ethical and moral fibre of Namibia.
The introspection announced by the head of state should have been, by definition, a national process. And to be clear, it should be a process as opposed to an event.
President Geingob can consult prime minister Geingob for the 1998 blueprint of a nationwide consultative process aimed at building systems and institutions to nurture societal ethics and integrity.
At the beginning of 1998, prime minister Geingob tasked secretary to Cabinet Isaac Kaulinge to set up technical teams comprising the ombudsman, auditor general, prosecutor general, and non-governmental role players (including trade unions, business sector and civic organisations) to plan for a national conference later that year.
The technical teams crisscrossed Namibia, talking to members of the public as well as gathering information through research and surveys.
The 1998 national conference on the promotion of ethics and combating of corruption made far-reaching recommendations for good governance: A code of ethical conduct for all political appointees and government employees; public disclosure of assets and any conflicting interests; ethical studies to be included in the school curriculum; institutions for the public role of civil society in the fight against corruption; and strengthening the auditor general, ombudsman and prosecutor general.
The establishment of what became the Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC) was also decided there, but bolstered with guarantees for independence from the governing executives.
The ACC was to recruit its own staff, for example. So, it is baffling to hear current ACC director Paulus Noa not only welcome a career spy as chief executive but saying there was nothing wrong with the government of the day appointing top ACC employees like him and his managers. Only a stooge or an ignorant person can welcome such blatant government installations in an organisation set up to eliminate corruption out of the same government.
Anyway, Geingob's 1998 conference argued for an anti-corruption agency that would be accountable only to parliament.
It is thus concerning to see Geingob presiding over much-weakened watchdog institutions despite claiming he was building accountability and good governance for Namibia.
A month ago, defence minister Hafeni Vilho demonstrated the disdain politicians and bureaucrats have for accountability when he blasted the auditor general for publishing the abuse of taxpayer resources in the military. For instance, the auditor general highlighted how the ministry was paying a salary and subsistence allowances to a ghost (non-existent) military attaché in the Democratic Republic of Congo.
Expect no one at the defence ministry to pay back the stolen public funds or even go through any transparent disciplinary process.
Such are the depths Namibia has sunken to since the 1990s when prime minister Geingob was in denial arguing that corruption was “not a serious problem”, but at least took steps to start cleaning house.
Now, Namibia seems to have gone to the dogs with a government that is not even willing to go through a concerted nationwide process of introspection –– like an alcoholic yet to admit addiction.
Such is the despair at the government's attitude that one can only borrow from Alan Paton's novel and say: Cry, the beloved country.
Instilling Fear to Silence the Outspoken
by Editorial Team
GAGGING a journalist employed at a taxpayer-funded news organisation has demonstrated growing intolerance by the governing elite towards critical voices.
Worryingly, the censure of Edward Muumbu over the past week by state news agency Nampa, because he apparently made president Hage Geingob nervous at a press conference, is the latest in a trend to silence government employees deemed outspoken or those who act against rampant corruption and the theft of public resources.
Even if presidential spokesperson Alfredo Tjiurimo Hengari ramps up the decibels when denying that the Presidency has anything to do with the gagging of journalists, there's enough evidence to suggest that those in high office are complicit in muzzling the outspoken. Most examples relate to the Fishrot scandal although not exclusively.
Geingob set the tone in December 2019 when he took aim at three of his Cabinet ministers (Calle Schlettwein, Tom Alweendo and Leon Jooste), telling them in a Cabinet meeting to resign.
“You are behaving like you are cleaner than others. You are criticising how the [Fishrot] case has been handled,” said Geingob, adding: “If you are not happy with how the case is being handled, then why don't you just resign?”
In fact, none of the ministers had criticised how the case was being handled. They merely expressed moral outrage on social media and called for tough action against the looters.
After a lull, there has been a flurry of action against the outspoken over the past two months: Lead Fishrot investigator Nelius Becker was transferred to a position of impotence – to head the police forensic unit, a key institution that requires hardcore science skills, which Becker does not remotely possess.
That was followed by the removal of Hannu Shipena as executive director of the Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC). Shipena regularly said the fight against corruption must be strengthened. A week or two before Shipena's removal, finance minister Iipumbu Shiimi was on social media castigating the ACC administrator for complaining that the lack of funding could hamper investigations.
And this week, Hengari issued a press release unabashedly saying that firing former health minister Bernard Haufiku was in no small part due to him “speaking out of turn” and without authorisation.
Geingob recently tore into Swapo MPs for not defending the government despite being in the majority. This was clearly aimed at leaving no room for contrarian views and to make lawmakers meek in their legislative role.
Geingob may have achieved his goal – Cabinet members this year have been less publicly vocal on corruption.
These latest incidents are a reminder that we are too close for comfort to autocratic states like China, where medical doctors, journalists and researchers who tried to warn the public about Covid-19 were gagged and jailed.
Silencing critical voices comes a long way in Swapo. At the state-funded broadcaster, NBC, critical programmes such as 'Open File' have been taken off air in 2014.
While we should not tolerate corruption, Swapo and other parties should be able to tolerate divergent views within their ranks. Ultimately, allowing competing views is a sign of strength. More than that, we need to respect and strengthen our hard-won independence.
We do not want – nor can we afford – our democracy to fall silent. The president and the ruling party need to shake off the outdated Cold War culture of weaponising fear.
Intolerance breeds intolerance. The consequences are manifold. While silence and powerlessness go hand in hand, they are dangerous bedmates. Look no further than Zimbabwe.
Namibians who cherish freedom of speech and value access to information (thus knowledge) as a prerequisite to individual or group development would be well advised to express moral outrage at this systematic erosion.
Even if presidential spokesperson Alfredo Tjiurimo Hengari ramps up the decibels when denying that the Presidency has anything to do with the gagging of journalists, there's enough evidence to suggest that those in high office are complicit in muzzling the outspoken. Most examples relate to the Fishrot scandal although not exclusively.
Geingob set the tone in December 2019 when he took aim at three of his Cabinet ministers (Calle Schlettwein, Tom Alweendo and Leon Jooste), telling them in a Cabinet meeting to resign.
“You are behaving like you are cleaner than others. You are criticising how the [Fishrot] case has been handled,” said Geingob, adding: “If you are not happy with how the case is being handled, then why don't you just resign?”
In fact, none of the ministers had criticised how the case was being handled. They merely expressed moral outrage on social media and called for tough action against the looters.
After a lull, there has been a flurry of action against the outspoken over the past two months: Lead Fishrot investigator Nelius Becker was transferred to a position of impotence – to head the police forensic unit, a key institution that requires hardcore science skills, which Becker does not remotely possess.
That was followed by the removal of Hannu Shipena as executive director of the Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC). Shipena regularly said the fight against corruption must be strengthened. A week or two before Shipena's removal, finance minister Iipumbu Shiimi was on social media castigating the ACC administrator for complaining that the lack of funding could hamper investigations.
And this week, Hengari issued a press release unabashedly saying that firing former health minister Bernard Haufiku was in no small part due to him “speaking out of turn” and without authorisation.
Geingob recently tore into Swapo MPs for not defending the government despite being in the majority. This was clearly aimed at leaving no room for contrarian views and to make lawmakers meek in their legislative role.
Geingob may have achieved his goal – Cabinet members this year have been less publicly vocal on corruption.
These latest incidents are a reminder that we are too close for comfort to autocratic states like China, where medical doctors, journalists and researchers who tried to warn the public about Covid-19 were gagged and jailed.
Silencing critical voices comes a long way in Swapo. At the state-funded broadcaster, NBC, critical programmes such as 'Open File' have been taken off air in 2014.
While we should not tolerate corruption, Swapo and other parties should be able to tolerate divergent views within their ranks. Ultimately, allowing competing views is a sign of strength. More than that, we need to respect and strengthen our hard-won independence.
We do not want – nor can we afford – our democracy to fall silent. The president and the ruling party need to shake off the outdated Cold War culture of weaponising fear.
Intolerance breeds intolerance. The consequences are manifold. While silence and powerlessness go hand in hand, they are dangerous bedmates. Look no further than Zimbabwe.
Namibians who cherish freedom of speech and value access to information (thus knowledge) as a prerequisite to individual or group development would be well advised to express moral outrage at this systematic erosion.
Good Governance Gone to the Dogs
by Editorial Team
A SPY has just been appointed chief administrator of Namibia's Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC). What a sick joke if not downright scary.
It is not so much that the government chose a career spy, but the manner in which it was done suggests intentions that go against good governance.
The battle between transparency and cover-up has now reached a crescendo amid the Fishrot scandal.
The intelligence world and anti-corruption work are like day and night: One operates in shadows, the other shines the spotlight into dark and hidden corners for maximum transparency.
Moving Tylvas Shilongo from his position as chief administrator of the Namibia Central Intelligence Service to the ACC should send chills down the spine of anti-corruption campaigners.
With this move, president Hage Geingob, prime minister Saara Kuugongelwa-Amadhila and the Cabinet have just trashed the president's mantra that “transparency plus accountability equals trust”.
For most of its existence, the ACC suffered from a lack of public trust as it got known for heavy-handed investigations of lowly ranked civil servants who abuse government resources while ignoring big-fish corruption.
With the conviction of a minister and the arrest of two more at the end of 2019, the ACC was just about starting to regain trust.
But a reversal is clearly on the cards: The minister of finance announced a budget showing the ACC as woefully underfunded, especially when expected to unravel one of the most sophisticated corruption sagas (Fishrot) Namibia has ever seen. Fishrot lead investigator Nelius Becker has been shifted to a position outside his field of experience and expertise and distanced from the ongoing Fishrot investigation.
And now a spy manager replaces arguably the most critical anti-corruption administrator the ACC has had in Hannu Shipena.
The latest move was as calculated as you can get. Shipena has been sent to one of the government's equivalents of a re-education camp, albeit not exactly with the brutality of the Chinese Xinjiang programmes or Soviet gulags – but the National Council for Higher Education is just as effective in silencing a strict administrator.
When Geingob addressed a Swapo press conference two weeks ago to deny that his party received Fishrot money, he said he did not want them to be viewed as acting as judge, jury and executioner. If these latest moves are not exactly that, then we can't imagine how it could be worse.
It is about time parliament and civil society take steps to maximum effect.
For starters, the ACC should be detached from political leaders and the civil service. It is preposterous that the ACC director general and chief administrator are appointed by the same government leaders they are supposed to investigate. At the very least the only business the Public Service Commission should have in the ACC is to advise on personnel matters, not recommend to the president who should be in charge.
The ACC must be autonomous similar to the judiciary, the Electoral Commission of Namibia (ECN), the ombudsman or any institution whose role is about the checks that are the responsibility of a public protector.
Like ECN commissioners, the recruitment of top ACC officials should be public and transparently done. What a shame even the University of Namibia beats the anti-corruption body's hiring in the very basics of good governance and accountability systems.
Parliament must immediately step up and ensure the ACC is strengthened with arm's-length protection from the government of the day.
As for civil society, protest must go as far as public interest litigation to keep the governing executives from weakening the fundamentals of our democracy.
Description
Founded: April 19, 1960, Windhoek, Namibia
Leadership: Hage Geingob, Hage Geingob (President)
https://www.sahistory.org.za/article/south-west-africa-peoples-organisation-swapo
SWAPO flag
The South West African People's Organisation (SWAPO) was founded in Windhoek, South West Africa (presently Namibia) on 19 April 1960 by Herman Toivo ja Toivo. The party was originally formed to advocated immediate Namibian independence from South Africa and became the country’s leading party following independence in 1990.
The SWA territory was entrusted by the League of Nations to South Africa under an administrative mandate after the First World War. After the Second World War, South Africa extended its apartheid policies to this territory and became a military occupier. After South Africa refused a United Nations order to withdraw from the trust territory in 1966, SWAPO turned to armed struggle.
SWAPO emerged as the sole liberation movement in the early 1960s because it had the support of the Ovambo, the largest ethnic group in Namibia. More a military organisation than a political one, SWAPO launched military operations against the South African government’s military positions. On 26 August 1966 the first major clash of the conflict took place, when a unit of the South African Police, supported by South African Air Force, exchanged fire with SWAPO forces. This date is generally regarded as the start of what became known in South Africa as the Border War.
Initially SWAPO suffered heavy losses against the South African Army but later SWAPO was backed by the Angolan ruling party, Popular Movement for the Liberation of Angola, the Soviet Union, the Norwegian government and the African National Congress. SWAPO used Angola as a base for guerrilla warfare on Namibian soil; operations were carried out by SWAPO’s guerrilla force, the People’s Liberation Army of Namibia (PLAN). Beginning in 1978 South Africa made periodic retaliatory land and air strikes into Angola. Herman Toivo ja Toivo, the founder of SWAPO, was imprisoned in South Africa for a 20-year term in 1968 but was released in 1984. Nujoma returned to Namibia in September 1989.
In 1978 the UN recognized SWAPO as the sole representative of the people of Namibia. Both SWAPO and South Africa agreed to a UN plan for a cease-fire, withdrawal of South African troops, and free elections to be guaranteed by UN security forces. After years of diplomatic maneuvering, South Africa finally accepted a UN resolution to that effect in December 1988. Sporadic fighting continued. In 1989 Nujoma was elected president and SWAPO won a majority of the delegates selected by the country’s voters to write a constitution for an independent Namibia. The following year a new constitution was adopted and Nujoma took office and in the same year South Africa completely withdrew unconditionally from Namibia.
SWAPO continued to dominate the political scene into the 21st century, transforming itself from a liberation movement into a governing party. SWAPO won the first and second election five years later. During its second term in office, the SWAPO dominated parliament and amended the constitution to allow their long term leader and now president of Namibia, Sam Nujoma, a third term in office. The constitutional amendment raised fears that this compromised Namibia’s democracy. The party won 75.1% of popular votes and 55 out of 78 seats in the parliamentary election held on 15 November 2004.
Controversy within the movement
Various groups have claimed that SWAPO committed serious human rights abuses against suspected spies during the Independence struggle (esp during the period of exile). The most serious of these was the detainee issue, which remains a divisive issue. Another issue was the Breaking the Wall of Silence (BWS), which was founded by those detainees to press the SWAPO-government on the issue of human rights abuses. SWAPO denies serious infractions and claims anything that did happen was in the name of liberation. The stories of the detainees begin with a series of successful South African raids that made the SWAPO leadership believe that they were spies in the movement. Hundreds of SWAPO cadres were imprisoned, tortured and interrogated.
References
Wallis, F. (2000). Nuusdagboek: feite en fratse oor 1000 jaar, Kaapstad: Human & Rousseau.|Encyclopedia Britannica Online (2009), ‘South West Africa People’s Organization’, available at: britannica.com [accessed 14 April 2009] |SWAPO [online], available at: wikipedia.org [accessed 14 April 2009]|Angola and South West Africa: A Forgotten War (1975-89) ”“ article published by geocities.com
Sources in Our Archive
The South West Commentator, Vol 2 No 3, February 1962
The South West Commentator,Vol 2 No 4, 28 March 1962
The South West Commentator, Vol 2 No 5, 16 May 1962
Namibia is showing wear and tear after 30 years under SWAPO rule
Interview with Oliver Tambo by Mayibuye,1 September 1981
Official Organ of the National Liberation Front,Vol 1.No 2, April 1963
Official Organ of the National Liberation Front, Vol 1.No 3, May 1963
Yu Chi Chan Club Pamphlet No. IV - Secret Communication by Allison Drew
National Liberation Front - Revolution in Latin America
South West Africa People’s Organisation (SWAPO) Report
Collections in the Archives
South West Africa People’s Organisation (SWAPO)
Nelson Rolihlahla Mandela
No comments:
Post a Comment