Tear not NYC but glue it together

What conclusion should one draw when an institution’s leadership structure cannot finish its term of office?

The case of the National Youth Council (NYC) of Namibia is slowly becoming a textbook example of fleeting leadership.

As things stand, the board chair has resigned, leaving a vacuum and an urgent scramble to fill the position. As fleeting leadership becomes the norm in NYC, this raises concerns about youth being denied benefits that the institution should bring them, if only its leadership functioned better, longer, and, frankly, with lesser “drama”.

Last year, NYC experienced board changes at least three times, and today we are again dealing with the resignation of a chairperson.

The frequency of leadership turnover raises a deeper question. Does swift and constant change improve the functionality of an institution whose mandate is to be the custodian of youth matters in Namibia, or does it cripple it?

There is fruit in the longevity of leadership. Institutions grow when leaders are given the space to execute a full term, to fail, to learn, to correct and to deliver.

Stability allows for continuity of programmes, accountability to objectives and proper handover between outgoing and incoming leaders. One wishes that leadership in NYC would serve its intended term and meet objectives by the end of it, rather than leaving unfinished business behind.

Frequent transitions in which leaders leave without finishing their terms not only create division but also taint institutions. Fired or departing boards often end up in court cases, draining energy, time and resources that should be serving young people.

More worrying is that these leaders will one day lead bigger institutions of the State, and if they cannot do better now as youth leaders, there is little assurance that they will suddenly transform when they climb higher leadership echelons.

Namibia itself offers the best lesson.

Our country is reputable for smooth transitions of power. From the founding President Sam Nujoma, to President Hifikepunye Pohamba, to President Hage Geingob, to President Nangolo Mbumba and now to President Netumbo Nandi-Ndaitwah, we have witnessed leadership changes that are orderly, respectful, and grounded in institutions rather than personalities.

We can contrast that with the UK's abrupt leadership change, which has nurtured less policy consistency, an inconsistent long-term direction, and a decline in democratic legitimacy. Institutions in Namibia, including NYC, should learn from the mistakes of the UK and learn from the smooth transitions of power from our heads of state.

Battlegrounds

My observation is that NYC exists for Namibian youth in all their diversity. Women and men. Students and the working class.

Youth from different tribes, regions, and political parties. The blessing of NYC is that it is not a private club of one ideology or interest group. It is a public institution created to represent the collective voice of young people.

These fundamental differences should not paralyse leadership. They should glue it together. The fact that NYC brings together people from different political parties, backgrounds and ambitions is not a weakness.

It is the very reason the institution exists. Diversity is not the enemy of functionality. Intolerance of diversity is.

Yet what we see too often is that these differences are allowed to grow beyond the institution's mandate. Boardrooms become battlegrounds.

Internal politics overshadows youth programmes. Personal agendas defeat institutional memory. The result is a Council that spends more time changing leaders than delivering to the young people it was established to serve.

The youth are the most energetic segment of our population. Energy, however, is neutral. It can build or destroy.

The same passion used to fight internally can be redirected into progressive input, policy advocacy, youth economic empowerment, and accountability to government. But when that energy is channelled into endless leadership wars, the institution becomes an enemy of its own progress.

The leader cannot be perfect, nor is leadership as smooth as chanting marching choruses. NYC needs leaders who can stay the course, tolerate differences, and prioritise mandate over ego.

The solution lies in youth unity, in having a common purpose and a shared agenda that places the institution above personal interests.

Until leaders begin to see themselves first as servants of Namibian youth rather than as custodians of personal ambitions, the cycle of instability will continue.

Until fundamental differences begin to bind leadership rather than tear it apart, the Council will remain trapped in a cycle of resignations, replacements, and excuses. And Namibian youth will continue paying the price for leadership that cannot finish what it starts.

Best wishes to the current and future NYC leadership!

Andreas Marungu is a Youth Leader, serves as a SPYL Central Committee Member, a UN Namibia Youth Advisory Group Member, a Tukwatha Youth Organisation Commissioner, and a Postgraduate Public Policy and Management candidate at IUM.