The Erosion of Parliamentary Decorum and Legislative Responsibility in Namibia

A functional Parliament is the cornerstone of any constitutional democracy. It is within this institution that laws are deliberated upon, national interests are articulated, and the Executive is held accountable.

However, when reason is supplanted by frivolity and disorder, the institution risks degenerating into a spectacle devoid of seriousness and purpose.

Regrettably, this appears to be the trajectory of Namibia’s current parliamentary discourse.

Increasingly, proceedings are dominated by incessant procedural interruptions, “points of order,” and repetitive questioning, often devoid of substantive legislative contribution.

While procedural tools are essential to parliamentary practice, their excessive and frivolous invocation undermines the dignity and efficiency of the legislative process.

The electorate did not entrust representatives with public office merely to engage in performative disruptions rather than meaningful lawmaking.

The Eighth(8th) Parliamentary Session, in particular, has drawn concern for its apparent decline in decorum, order, and rational deliberation.

Losing public confidence

Parliament is not a theatre for political theatrics, nor is it a forum for trivial engagement.

It is a constitutional institution entrusted with the solemn responsibility of legislating for the Republic and safeguarding democratic governance.

When this responsibility is neglected, the institution itself risks losing public confidence and credibility.

The constitutional mandate of legislators is clear. Members of Parliament are entrusted with reviewing legislation, tabling bills, amending outdated or oppressive laws, interpreting legal frameworks through debate, and ultimately passing legislation that advances the nation's welfare.

Equally important is their oversight responsibility to hold ministers and the Executive accountable for governance and policy implementation.

However, a troubling pattern has emerged in which parliamentary engagement appears increasingly superficial.

The legislative record reflects an imbalance between procedural interjections and substantive legislative initiatives.

Parliamentary performance cannot be measured merely by the volume of questions raised or procedural interruptions recorded; rather, it must be evaluated by the quality and quantity of legislation proposed, debated, and enacted for the benefit of the nation.

The Namibian Constitution, inter alia, provides clear guidance on the conduct and responsibilities of Members of Parliament.

Article 60(1)(a) inter alia, requires that all members of the National Assembly maintain the dignity and image of the Assembly both during its sittings and in their conduct outside Parliament.

This provision underscores the principle that a parliamentary office carries not only authority but also a profound obligation of decorum and integrity.

Furthermore, Article 60(1)(a), supra, establishes principles of conduct that implicitly prohibit the advancement of tribalism, racism, or any form of discriminatory rhetoric within parliamentary discourse. Such conduct stands in direct contradiction to Namibia’s foundational commitment to equality, unity, and the principle of “One Namibia, One Nation.”

Article 46 of the Constitution clearly defines the composition of the National Assembly.

It provides for seventy-two members(72) elected by registered voters through a general, direct, and secret ballot.

Binding authority

Additionally, the President may appoint not more than six members under Article 32(5)(c) based on their expertise, status, skill, or experience.

However, such members do not possess voting rights in the Assembly.

These constitutional provisions are unequivocal. Only Namibian citizens who meet the qualifications stipulated under Article 17, and subject to Article 47, are eligible to serve as members of the National Assembly. Consequently, public or parliamentary attempts to question the nationality of a duly appointed Member of Parliament under article 46(1)(b), such as Hon. Steenkamp, without credible constitutional grounds, are both irrational and inconsistent with the constitutional framework governing parliamentary membership.

The National Assembly is not merely a political platform; it is a legislative body entrusted with shaping the Republic's legal architecture.

Laws enacted by Parliament constitute the primary sources of law, formally promulgated as Acts of Parliament, which carry binding authority within Namibia’s legal system.

Legal literacy

Given the gravity of this responsibility, it is reasonable to argue that Members of Parliament should possess at least a foundational understanding of law and governance.

While democratic representation must remain inclusive, a minimum threshold of legal literacy, such as a certificate in paralegal studies or a diploma in legal studies, could significantly enhance the quality of legislative deliberation and statutory drafting.

Lawmaking requires not merely political rhetoric but also legal comprehension, analytical reasoning, and interpretative competence.

Without such competence, the legislative process risks being dominated by procedural distractions rather than substantive policy development.

In the long term, this weakens Parliament's institutional capacity to produce coherent and progressive legislation.

Parliamentarians have been provided with modern technological tools and institutional resources that can facilitate research, legislative drafting, and policy analysis.

These resources should be utilised to strengthen legislative output and to develop laws that meaningfully advance the interests and welfare of the Namibian people.

Ultimately, Parliament must remain an institution defined by dignity, intellectual rigour, and constitutional responsibility.

It must never be reduced to a forum for theatrics, ridicule, or divisive rhetoric.

The integrity of democratic governance depends on a legislature that embodies professionalism, reasoned debate, and an unwavering commitment to the rule of law.

Namibia’s Parliament must therefore reaffirm its constitutional purpose: to legislate wisely, deliberate rationally, and serve the people with integrity and seriousness.

Stephanus Pombili is a Namibian voter and a Bachelor of Arts in Law student. The views expressed in this article are his own.