EDITORIAL: Oil, efficiency and accountability

The unfolding debate over where Namibia’s petroleum mandate should be anchored is an early warning of the bumpy road ahead. Though still in its infancy, the tug-of-war has already begun, with various actors pulling the sector in competing directions.

President Netumbo Nandi-Ndaitwah has argued that the petroleum portfolio should be housed in the Presidency to cut through the lethargic bureaucracy that has long slowed decision-making. In a system where processes that should take days often drag on for months, the argument for efficiency carries weight.

The opposition, however, has pushed back on two fronts. PDM leader McHenry Venaani maintains that the president already possesses sufficient executive authority to provide decisive leadership, even if the sector remains under the energy ministry. IPC president Panduleni Itula, meanwhile, has cautioned that centralising upstream petroleum powers in the Presidency risks weakening constitutional accountability.

This is a necessary and healthy debate. Namibians must engage one another to find common ground on an issue that will shape the country’s economic future. It is worth recalling that former president Hage Geingob similarly pulled the green hydrogen portfolio from the line ministry and kept it within close reach of the Presidency.

On paper, every argument has merit, including the president’s. Her concerns about inefficiencies are understandable, particularly when measured against her ambitious pledge to create 500 000 jobs during her term.

But it is equally critical that the Presidency remain alive to the nation’s caution and historical scars. Namibians have not yet recovered from past centralised arrangements that were ill-conceived from the outset – most notably the 2015 Fisheries Act, which centralised fishing quota distribution to the minister and ultimately gave rise to the Fishrot scandal.

Petroleum may well demand speed and decisiveness. But it also demands restraint, transparency and robust oversight.