Sankwasa and RedForce at each other's throats in Walvis

Urban and Rural Development Minister James Sankwasa has ordered a forensic investigation into the operations of the Walvis Bay Municipality, accusing councillors and senior officials of continuing to enforce what he says is an invalid debt-collection contract with RedForce Debt Management CC.

However, the minister’s position on the legality of the contract is at odds with advice previously issued by the ministry of finance, which said in May that the Public Procurement Act authorises an accounting officer to award and sign procurement contracts.

RedForce owner Selma Nangombe has also rejected suggestions that the company has breached its contractual obligations, saying the dispute should be resolved through due process rather than political confrontation.

In a letter to Walvis Bay mayor John Shimbilinga dated 16 September 2026, Sankwasa argued that the RedForce contract was invalid because it was signed only by the municipality’s chief executive officer and was not co-signed as required under section 31A of the Local Authorities Act.

He said the attorney general had issued a legal opinion declaring the contract flawed and invalid.

But a 13 May 2026 letter from the ministry of finance to Walvis Bay CEO Victoria Kapenda provides a different interpretation of the signing requirements under the Public Procurement Act.

The finance ministry said its advice was specifically limited to the Public Procurement Act because it was not mandated to interpret the Local Authorities Act.

It cited section 74 of the Procurement Act, which states that an accounting officer may not delegate the power to issue contract awards or sign agreements.

“It is evident from the above-cited provisions of the Act that the accounting officer is vested with the authority to award and sign procurement contracts,” the ministry said.

On the question of co-signing, the ministry said the Procurement Act is silent.

“However, the absence of co-signing or witnessing does not, under the Public Procurement Act, 2015, render a procurement contract invalid,” the letter states.

Award versus signing

Sankwasa, however, maintains that the Procurement Act cannot be relied upon to validate the RedForce agreement.

He told the council that awarding a procurement contract and signing the resulting agreement are separate processes.

According to the minister, an award letter only communicates the successful bidder’s selection and does not contain all the terms and conditions necessary to constitute the final contract.

He therefore argues that while the CEO could issue an award, she could not sign the contract without the co-signature prescribed by the Local Authorities Act.

The dispute over the contract's validity comes against the backdrop of a long-running battle between Walvis Bay Municipality and RedForce.

The municipality terminated RedForce’s contract in April 2024, but the debt collector approached the High Court. The parties subsequently reached a settlement under which the contract was reinstated on the same terms and conditions as if it had never been terminated.

Walvis Bay's own public meeting minutes from July 2025 recorded the council's position that the RedForce contract was valid and would remain in force, although conditions would be reviewed.

RedForce hits back

RedForce owner Selma Nangombe said the company understood concerns surrounding debt collection and accepted that public concerns should be heard and addressed.

She also acknowledged Sankwasa's oversight role over local authorities, but said oversight must not be used to bypass due process.

“We understand the public outcry surrounding debt collection and accept that those concerns must be heard and addressed,” Nangombe said.

Nangombe also objected to suggestions of improper dealings involving those defending RedForce, saying a question of law and due process should not become a political contest between parties.

She said RedForce did not expect debt collection to be popular.

“People are perfectly entitled not to like RedForce; we have never expected debt collection to win a popularity contest. But popularity cannot determine legality,” she said.

Extra charges under scrutiny

Sankwasa has also challenged the additional charges imposed on residents whose municipal debts are handed to RedForce.

He argues that residents are effectively required to pay the underlying municipal debt as well as an additional percentage charged by RedForce.

The minister says this amounts to an unlawful collection under the Usury Act and places an additional burden on residents.

Sankwasa's position reflects his broader opposition to RedForce. In August 2025, he directed municipalities and town councils not to renew existing RedForce contracts when they expire and instructed authorities that had not yet contracted the company not to do so.

He questioned why councillors and senior officials were defending the RedForce arrangement despite the attorney general's alleged legal opinion against it.

“The way councillors and senior staff members defend a legally invalid contract smells of a financial rat,” he wrote.

He questioned whether councillors had any financial interests in RedForce, but did not provide evidence in the letter that any councillor or official had received money from RedForce.

The minister has directed the Walvis Bay council to act on the attorney general's legal opinion by 30 September 2026.