Namdia ‘unable to find’ Rubicon contract

Namib Desert Diamonds (Namdia) says it cannot find the contract under which Rubicon Security Services was providing security at its premises when diamonds worth more than N$300 million were stolen in January last year.The disclosure is contained in an affidavit filed by Namdia acting chief executive officer Lelly Usiku in the High Court on 17 September as part of the company's civil dispute with G4S Secure Solutions Namibia.Namdia is suing G4S for about N$314 million over the security services it provided when armed suspects entered Namdia's Windhoek premises on 18 January 2025, restrained employees and security personnel and stole hundreds of parcels of diamonds.Namdia alleges that G4S was grossly negligent in providing remote monitoring and armed-response services during the robbery. G4S disputes the claim and has sought access to documents relating to Namdia's security arrangements as part of its defence.Among the documents sought was Namdia's agreement with Rubicon Security Services.Usiku said Namdia searched for the agreement but could not locate it.“The plaintiff, despite all reasonable efforts made and searches conducted, is unable to find a copy of the contract between it and Rubicon Security Services in relation to rendering of security services on its premises,” Usiku said.She nevertheless confirmed that Rubicon was a Namdia service provider when the robbery occurred.“The onboarding process happened at a time prior to establishment of the plaintiff’s procurement department. The plaintiff can, however, confirm and does confirm that Rubicon was also a service provider at the time of the incident,” Usiku said.Her affidavit does not state when Rubicon was appointed, how the appointment was made, who approved it, the value or duration of the contract or the precise services Rubicon was contracted to provide.Rubicon guard features in robbery evidenceRubicon's presence at the Namdia premises on the day of the robbery has also emerged in evidence presented during criminal proceedings arising from the heist.Namibian Police Chief Inspector Simeon Nghilalulwa testified during court proceedings about a Rubicon security guard identified only as Herman, who was allegedly among the security personnel restrained during the robbery.Nghilalulwa also testified that investigators recovered a written plan from a vehicle belonging to the late Max Endjala, who the State alleges was involved in the robbery.According to Nghilalulwa's testimony, the document detailed aspects of the planned robbery, including tying up security guards, scattering diamonds and using a getaway vehicle.Namdia protection officer Francis Eiseb was killed during the heist, while Endjala later died of gunshot wounds sustained in the robbery.Xiphos also on siteCourt documents also place a third security company, Xiphos Protection Group, at Namdia's premises on the day of the robbery.However, Usiku said Xiphos was not providing security services to Namdia at the time.“Xiphos Protection Group was not a security service provider to the plaintiff during the time of the incident,” she said.According to the court documents, Xiphos was appointed by Namdia shortly after the robbery through what was described as a “crisis committee”, with questions raised in the proceedings over whether Namdia's internal procurement procedures were followed.The documents do not explain what role Xiphos personnel were performing at Namdia's premises on the day of the robbery, who requested their presence or under what authority they were there.Security records unavailableThe Rubicon agreement is not the only security-related record Namdia said it cannot provide in the civil proceedings.Usiku said Namdia has no CCTV footage or audio recordings of the incident because the electricity supply to the premises was disconnected before the robbery.“There is no CCTV footage and audio recordings of the incidents on account of the fact that the electricity supply to the premises was disconnected by the perpetrators prior to the incident,” she said.According to Usiku, Namdia has a standard operating procedure, security plan and compliance records relevant to the incident, but does not have maintenance records for its security equipment covering the months preceding the robbery.“The plaintiff, moreover, is not in possession of any service or maintenance records for alarm panels, CCTV equipment or other security equipment at its premises for the period June 2024 to January 2025 as no such records exist,” Usiku said.G4S is seeking the documents as part of its defence against Namdia's damages claim.N$335m heistThe criminal proceedings and Namdia's civil claim against G4S contain different figures for the diamonds involved.In the criminal case, the State alleges that 512 parcels of diamonds worth approximately N$335 million were stolen during the robbery.Namdia's civil claim against G4S, meanwhile, is for approximately N$314 million in alleged losses arising from the incident.According to the criminal case against the accused, diamonds worth about N$40.6 million were recovered, while 452 parcels valued at approximately N$295 million allegedly remain unrecovered.Former Namdia protection officer Joel Angula, Sam Shololo and former G4S guard Samuel Shipanga have been sent for trial in the High Court on charges arising from the robbery.The three have not been convicted and the allegations against them remain to be determined.The civil proceedings between Namdia and G4S are separate from the criminal prosecution.

Namdia ‘unable to find’ Rubicon contract

Comments

Namibian Sun 2026-10-06

Please login to leave a comment

Namdia ‘unable to find’ Rubicon contract

Comments

Namibian Sun 2026-10-06

Please login to leave a comment

Subscription Required to Access Content ×

Login

Subscription Required to Access Content