Widow of slain Namdia security officer demands nearly N$4m

The widow of a Namib Desert Diamonds (Namdia) security officer who was fatally shot during a robbery at the company’s premises early last year has issued a N$3.89 million letter of demand against the state-owned diamond trader, accusing it of failing to provide a safe working environment.

Through Metcalfe Beukes Attorneys, Shirley Eiseb is demanding N$3.89 million in damages and benefits following the death of her husband, Francis Eiseb, who was killed while on duty on 18 January 2025 during the botched robbery – which also left one of the alleged robbers dead at the scene.

The claim, contained in a formal letter of demand dated 18 December 2025, alleges that Namdia failed to take adequate precautions despite being aware of potential security threats at its high-value diamond facility.

Fatal robbery

Eiseb was employed by Namdia as a senior protection officer from 2018 until his death, the letter recounts.

His widow’s legal representatives claim he was fatally shot during a diamond heist while performing his security duties and acting within the scope of his employment.

The family argues that, as his employer, Namdia bore both a statutory and common law duty to ensure his safety.

“It is trite that an employer bears a statutory and common law duty of care to provide a working environment that is safe, free from unnecessary risk and properly secured against foreseeable harm,” the legal letter states.

The legal team cites section 39 of the Labour Act, which requires employers to provide safe working conditions, appropriate protective equipment and adequate training for employees.

The family’s lawyers further argue that Namdia, as a state-owned enterprise responsible for safeguarding and trading Namibia’s diamonds, carries an elevated duty of care given the inherent risks of protecting such valuable national assets.

Allegations of prior warnings

Central to the claim are allegations that Namdia had prior knowledge of a potential robbery at its premises but allegedly failed to implement adequate security measures.

The lawyers argue that armed robbery at a diamond facility is an obvious and foreseeable risk. They say Namdia’s failure to provide protective gear, enforce security protocols or maintain effective response systems amounts to a reckless disregard for employee safety.

They further claim that the incident itself demonstrates negligence, invoking the legal principle of res ipsa loquitur, which allows negligence to be inferred from the mere occurrence of an event that proper safeguards should have prevented.

The claim also cites previous Namibian case law dealing with employer liability and wrongful omission.

Financial and emotional toll

Eiseb is survived by his wife and two dependent children, who the legal letter says relied entirely on him for financial support, maintenance, and medical expenses.

According to the demand, the deceased earned a monthly income of N$54 612 and contributed approximately N$35 500 towards household expenses.

His family’s claim for loss of support is calculated on the basis that he had eight years remaining before retirement at age 65.

This calculation places the alleged financial loss at N$2.89 million.

The family is also seeking N$1 million for emotional shock, pain and suffering.

The lawyers say the trauma was compounded by the fact that the family allegedly heard the fatal shooting, as they lived near the Namdia premises.

The letter adds that the family has since faced severe financial distress.

Education and medical support demands

Beyond damages, the family is demanding additional support from Namdia, including medical aid cover for Shirley until she reaches retirement age and medical aid for the children until they complete undergraduate degrees.

The attorneys also highlight medical expenses linked to a diabetic child and ongoing healthcare needs for the widow.

The family is also demanding N$113 630 to cover tertiary education costs for both children, alongside a monthly student allowance of N$5 000 for each child until graduation.

According to the letter, daughter Faith is currently enrolled in her second year of a bachelor of journalism and media technology at the Namibia University of Technology, while her sister Zaphania has registered for a bachelor of technology in cybersecurity at the National Institute of Technology.

Earlier attempt rebuffed

The demand letter states that Shirley Eiseb initially approached Namdia in February 2025 requesting death-related benefits. The company reportedly responded in March 2025, acknowledging that Eiseb died while on duty but rejecting liability for damages suffered by the family.

The widow’s lawyers describe the response as legally unsustainable and morally troubling.

“To acknowledge that an employee lost his life during the course of employment and while on duty yet deny responsibility is an appalling abdication of both legal and moral duty,” the letter states.

Namdia response

In a subsequent response to the attorneys, Namdia confirmed receipt of the letter of demand and indicated that it is considering the claims.

The company said certain benefits are payable to the deceased’s estate in accordance with applicable legal provisions. These include severance pay, accumulated leave, pension fund contributions and death benefits, as well as an accidental claim.

However, Namdia said it would not disclose the amounts of these benefits, citing confidentiality, and advised that further details could be obtained through the family.

The company has not indicated whether it intends to accept liability for the death or settle the damages claim.