Liswaniso disputes legality of suspension
Argues proceedings were unlawful
The suspension of Katima Mulilo Town Council CEO Raphael Liswaniso has escalated into a major legal battle, with his response challenging the legality, authority and procedural compliance of the disciplinary process.
Documents seen by Namibian Sun indicate that Liswaniso’s legal team has filed points in limine, arguing that his suspension and the ensuing disciplinary proceedings are unlawful, ultra vires and null from the outset.
The filings challenge raises questions about whether those who initiated the process had the legal authority to do so and whether statutory procedures were followed.
Moreover, they cite alleged breaches of the Local Authorities Act, the Labour Act, council personnel rules and the terms of Liswaniso’s employment contract, contending that the disciplinary process is legally defective at its foundation.
Origins of the dispute
Liswaniso was suspended on 28 October 2025 without pay and benefits by the urban and rural development ministry and charged with alleged misconduct, including contraventions of the Local Authorities Act, internal personnel rules and council procedures.
However, his legal team argues that the suspension was imposed without lawful authority and in the absence of a valid council resolution authorising disciplinary action.
According to the documents, the Katima Mulilo Town Council was only duly constituted on 5 December 2025, at which point it became legally empowered to deal with disciplinary matters through properly adopted resolutions.
The filings further contend that the charges were drawn up and signed by a private legal practitioner who allegedly lacked the legal mandate to initiate disciplinary proceedings on behalf of the council, rendering the charge sheet invalid.
Suspension without pay contested
A central issue raised is the nature and duration of Liswaniso’s suspension. He was suspended without pay and for an indefinite period, a move his legal team argues violates his employment contract, which limits consecutive suspensions to a maximum of six weeks.
The challenge further relies on the Labour Act, 2007, and Personnel Rule No. 286 of 2010, arguing that suspensions must be lawful, reasonable and procedurally fair. According to the filings, these requirements were not met, as the suspension was imposed without council approval and outside the framework prescribed by law.
The lawfulness of appointments made in the disciplinary process has also been placed under scrutiny. Kaijata Kangueehi was appointed as initiator of the proceedings, while advocate Slysken Makando was designated as chairperson of the disciplinary hearing.
The filings argue that these appointments were made without lawful authority and in contravention of Sections 27 and 29 of the Local Authorities Act, as well as the Katima Mulilo Town Council Personnel Rules. It is further argued that any disciplinary process initiated without proper council approval is invalid.
Liswaniso also cites a ministerial directive dated 2 December 2025, which retrospectively invalidated all council actions taken after 25 November 2025. On this basis, he argues that any appointments or decisions made during that period were ultra vires and legally void.
Multiple allegations
The disciplinary action is based on an extensive charge sheet listing more than 40 allegations against Liswaniso, covering a period from 2017 to 2025.
The charges include allegations of dereliction of duty, repeated insubordination, gross abuse of authority, gross negligence, procurement irregularities and corruption. Several counts relate to alleged failures to comply with instructions from the town council and the minister’s representative, including requests for reports on labour disputes, staff structures, acting appointments, wage grading, vacant posts and staff qualifications.
Other charges allege irregular staff appointments, prolonged acting positions and promotions allegedly effected without proper procedures, council resolutions or ministerial approval. The charge sheet also cites alleged violations of procurement laws, including the unlawful award of tenders and the authorisation of payments, allegedly exposing the council to financial losses running into millions.
The most serious allegations relate to the alleged unlawful alienation of council land, including claims that land was sold or exchanged with private entities without valid council resolutions, ministerial consent or written contracts.
Liswaniso has not yet pleaded to the charges and maintains that the entire charge sheet is legally defective, forming part of the basis of his preliminary legal challenge.
Relief sought
The filings argue that every step of the disciplinary process, from the suspension to the drafting of charges and the appointment of officials, falls outside the legal powers of those involved. The documents emphasise that statutory compliance is mandatory, regardless of whether a local authority is under ministerial oversight or operating during a transitional period.
Liswaniso is seeking the immediate lifting of his suspension, reinstatement to his position and the restoration of all contractual benefits. He is also seeking a declaration that the disciplinary process is unlawful and of no legal force or effect.
Hearing proceeds amid objections
Despite the objections raised in the points in limine, the disciplinary hearing commenced on 12 January. The parties are now awaiting rulings on the preliminary legal issues, which will determine whether the hearing can lawfully proceed.
When contacted for comment, Liswaniso confirmed that his disciplinary hearing has begun but said he would only be willing to provide further information at a later stage.
Namibian Sun further understands that Liswaniso is concerned about the impartiality of the chairperson, Makando, who is alleged to have previously provided legal services to urban and rural development minister James Sankwasa. The issue has been cited as part of Liswaniso’s broader objection to the fairness of the proceedings.
Documents seen by Namibian Sun indicate that Liswaniso’s legal team has filed points in limine, arguing that his suspension and the ensuing disciplinary proceedings are unlawful, ultra vires and null from the outset.
The filings challenge raises questions about whether those who initiated the process had the legal authority to do so and whether statutory procedures were followed.
Moreover, they cite alleged breaches of the Local Authorities Act, the Labour Act, council personnel rules and the terms of Liswaniso’s employment contract, contending that the disciplinary process is legally defective at its foundation.
Origins of the dispute
Liswaniso was suspended on 28 October 2025 without pay and benefits by the urban and rural development ministry and charged with alleged misconduct, including contraventions of the Local Authorities Act, internal personnel rules and council procedures.
However, his legal team argues that the suspension was imposed without lawful authority and in the absence of a valid council resolution authorising disciplinary action.
According to the documents, the Katima Mulilo Town Council was only duly constituted on 5 December 2025, at which point it became legally empowered to deal with disciplinary matters through properly adopted resolutions.
The filings further contend that the charges were drawn up and signed by a private legal practitioner who allegedly lacked the legal mandate to initiate disciplinary proceedings on behalf of the council, rendering the charge sheet invalid.
Suspension without pay contested
A central issue raised is the nature and duration of Liswaniso’s suspension. He was suspended without pay and for an indefinite period, a move his legal team argues violates his employment contract, which limits consecutive suspensions to a maximum of six weeks.
The challenge further relies on the Labour Act, 2007, and Personnel Rule No. 286 of 2010, arguing that suspensions must be lawful, reasonable and procedurally fair. According to the filings, these requirements were not met, as the suspension was imposed without council approval and outside the framework prescribed by law.
The lawfulness of appointments made in the disciplinary process has also been placed under scrutiny. Kaijata Kangueehi was appointed as initiator of the proceedings, while advocate Slysken Makando was designated as chairperson of the disciplinary hearing.
The filings argue that these appointments were made without lawful authority and in contravention of Sections 27 and 29 of the Local Authorities Act, as well as the Katima Mulilo Town Council Personnel Rules. It is further argued that any disciplinary process initiated without proper council approval is invalid.
Liswaniso also cites a ministerial directive dated 2 December 2025, which retrospectively invalidated all council actions taken after 25 November 2025. On this basis, he argues that any appointments or decisions made during that period were ultra vires and legally void.
Multiple allegations
The disciplinary action is based on an extensive charge sheet listing more than 40 allegations against Liswaniso, covering a period from 2017 to 2025.
The charges include allegations of dereliction of duty, repeated insubordination, gross abuse of authority, gross negligence, procurement irregularities and corruption. Several counts relate to alleged failures to comply with instructions from the town council and the minister’s representative, including requests for reports on labour disputes, staff structures, acting appointments, wage grading, vacant posts and staff qualifications.
Other charges allege irregular staff appointments, prolonged acting positions and promotions allegedly effected without proper procedures, council resolutions or ministerial approval. The charge sheet also cites alleged violations of procurement laws, including the unlawful award of tenders and the authorisation of payments, allegedly exposing the council to financial losses running into millions.
The most serious allegations relate to the alleged unlawful alienation of council land, including claims that land was sold or exchanged with private entities without valid council resolutions, ministerial consent or written contracts.
Liswaniso has not yet pleaded to the charges and maintains that the entire charge sheet is legally defective, forming part of the basis of his preliminary legal challenge.
Relief sought
The filings argue that every step of the disciplinary process, from the suspension to the drafting of charges and the appointment of officials, falls outside the legal powers of those involved. The documents emphasise that statutory compliance is mandatory, regardless of whether a local authority is under ministerial oversight or operating during a transitional period.
Liswaniso is seeking the immediate lifting of his suspension, reinstatement to his position and the restoration of all contractual benefits. He is also seeking a declaration that the disciplinary process is unlawful and of no legal force or effect.
Hearing proceeds amid objections
Despite the objections raised in the points in limine, the disciplinary hearing commenced on 12 January. The parties are now awaiting rulings on the preliminary legal issues, which will determine whether the hearing can lawfully proceed.
When contacted for comment, Liswaniso confirmed that his disciplinary hearing has begun but said he would only be willing to provide further information at a later stage.
Namibian Sun further understands that Liswaniso is concerned about the impartiality of the chairperson, Makando, who is alleged to have previously provided legal services to urban and rural development minister James Sankwasa. The issue has been cited as part of Liswaniso’s broader objection to the fairness of the proceedings.
Comments
Namibian Sun
No comments have been left on this article