Amutse insists he’s in control of oil

Industries, mines and energy minister Modestus Amutse has rejected claims that advisers outside his ministry are directing key decisions on oil and petroleum.

The minister insists that the current legal framework places full authority within the ministry until parliament amends the Petroleum (Exploration and Production) Act of 1991.

The 2025 petroleum amendment bill seeks to centralise strategic oversight of upstream oil and gas under the Office of the President, formally establish an Upstream Petroleum Unit (UPU) with executive authority over licensing and regulation, and restructure reporting lines away from the ministry’s traditional administrative framework.

Amutse was responding in parliament to questions from Affirmative Repositioning lawmaker Job Amupanda, who said it appeared the minister was taking directives from “oil advisers” on petroleum exploration licences and local content policy.

“The status quo is to be maintained by you. It’s my understanding that any decision regarding oil and petroleum must first be reviewed with the state’s oil advisers. That is very concerning because it is not in accordance with the existing law, nor with the principles of the rule of law,” Amupanda told the house.

Independent Patriots for Change (IPC) president Dr Panduleni Itula has warned that the proposed changes would shift operational power to presidential appointees, while parliament would retain only indirect oversight through the responsible minister.

Although the bill has yet to pass, the president has already established the UPU within the presidency, appointing a director and deputy director – roles that the amendments are intended to formalise in law.

Kornelia Shilunga and Carlo McLeod have since become highly active in upstream petroleum matters, including international engagements and sector coordination, despite the Petroleum Act remaining unchanged.

Upstream petroleum matters

Amutse dismissed the allegation, saying there is no directive requiring him to seek approval from the president's office before acting on upstream petroleum matters.

“Whether the minister must first be advised by a State House unit before taking decisions related to petroleum exploration licences is not correct,” he stressed, adding that decisions are processed internally and that the final authority still rests with the minister.

Itula slams power shift

While government maintains that the current legal order remains intact, Itula has issued a sharp constitutional critique of both the proposed amendments and the steps taken ahead of their passage.

In a detailed statement, Itula argued that parliament has already legislated the administration of Namibia’s natural resources and assigned that authority to the minister through the Assignment of Powers Act, Act 4 of 1990.

“In essence, a minister to whom an Act of Parliament has assigned the administration of Namibia’s resources cannot, on the implicit demand of the apex of the executive, return such powers to parliament and ask parliament to reassign them to the president," he said.

He described the process as “shocking” and “absurd”, saying it amounts to “a violation of the principle of the rule of law and constitutionality", adding that neither ministers nor parliament possess the authority to reassign such powers in the absence of a clear legal provision.

The IPC president pointed to Articles 40 and 41 of the Constitution, which make ministers individually and collectively accountable to parliament, arguing that shifting authority to unelected officials undermines that accountability.

Addressing the role of the president, he acknowledged that Article 32 of the Constitution empowers the head of state to create government departments, but argued that it does not extend to the appointment of directors who exercise statutory powers without enabling legislation.

“In demonstration of authoritarianism, the president created the Upstream Petroleum Unit in the Presidency and appointed the director and deputy director, whilst the unit, for all intents and purposes, is still legitimately under the administrative powers assigned to the minister,” he said.

Rule of law

He further argued that no Act of Parliament has abolished the upstream petroleum function from the ministry or separated it from midstream and downstream regulation.

In his view, proceeding as if such a transfer has already occurred represents a disregard for parliamentary supremacy and the separation of powers.

“The degree of authoritarianism and disregard for the rule of law and parliamentary supremacy is absurd and demonstrates an erosion of our constitutional democracy. We are sliding deeper into the muddy territory so familiar to African dictators,” Itula warned.

He called on all parties to abandon what he described as a “farce” and to respect the supremacy of parliament and constitutional governance, warning against the betrayal of liberation ideals and democratic principles for personal or political interests.

[email protected]