Court strikes off fired RA bosses’ urgent bid for reinstatement

The Windhoek High Court has struck from the roll an urgent application by former Roads Authority (RA) executives Johan Boois and Richard Milinga, dealing a blow to their attempt to return to their posts following their dismissal over a controversial N$16 million vehicle procurement saga.

In a ruling delivered by Judge Nate Ndauendapo, the matter was regarded as finalised and removed from the roll, with no order as to costs.

Boois, the former executive officer for transportation, and Milinga, the former divisional manager for the transport inspectorate, had approached the court seeking urgent reinstatement after being dismissed earlier this year following an internal disciplinary process.

The two argued that the RA mishandled both the disciplinary proceedings and the appeal process, alleging procedural irregularities, interference and unfair treatment throughout the hearing.

Represented by lawyer Uno Katjipuka, the pair claimed their right to a fair hearing was compromised by what they described as employer pressure, predetermined timelines and irregular conduct during disciplinary proceedings linked to the procurement of 17 vehicles intended for law enforcement and road safety operations.

Their dismissals stemmed from allegations that the N$16 million tender had been improperly inflated. It was previously alleged that the vehicles were acquired for around N$1.2 million each despite showroom prices of roughly N$800 000 at Windhoek dealerships.

Boois and Milinga argued that disciplinary findings against them were inconsistent and that evidence presented in their defence had been ignored.

They further alleged that the RA interfered in the disciplinary process by pressuring disciplinary chairperson Ileni Velikoshi to conclude the hearing within timelines imposed by the board’s human capital committee.

Correspondence previously seen by Namibian Sun reportedly instructed the chairperson to finalise the hearing by 31 August 2025 and deliver judgment by 10 November 2025.

Katjipuka previously argued that the directives undermined the chairperson’s independence and contributed to a pressured and biased outcome.

The former executives also cited administrative failures, illness-related absences during proceedings and delays in the delivery of judgment, claiming these issues were later used to exert further pressure on the process.

Katjipuka additionally challenged findings of dishonesty against her clients, maintaining that the procurement process followed approved procedures and reasonable contractual interpretation.

RA chief executive officer Conrad Lutombi Tjivikua previously maintained that the disciplinary process complied with the organisation’s governance framework and disciplinary procedures.

“The RA confirms that due process was followed in accordance with the organisation’s disciplinary procedures and governance framework,” Tjivikua said at the time.

He also argued that the matter did not meet the threshold for urgency and should instead proceed through normal labour dispute mechanisms.

The authority declined to elaborate on the reasons behind the dismissals, citing the rights and dignity of those involved.