Kahimise turns to court

Suspended City of Windhoek CEO Robert Kahimise and others are arguing that ulterior motives linked to the suspension of City Police chief Abraham Kanime, and the upcoming office bearer elections, are major factors in the efforts to boot him from his post.

Supporting affidavits filed at the High Court on Friday, alongside Kahimise’s documents, to have his second 5 November suspension overturned, accused some Windhoek councillors of pushing for the second suspension despite warnings from a legal and other officers that it could backfire.

Kahimise’s lawyer Patrick Kauta on Friday filed the papers asking court to overturn Kahimise’s second suspension that was implemented on Monday last week, on the grounds that his suspension was without valid reasons, non-procedural and unlawful. The matter is to be heard on Monday next week.

Kahimise is also arguing that he was again not given sufficient time to defend his suspension nor given detailed reasons for that suspension.

“The right to be given reasons and ra easonable opportunity to make representation are an indispensable part of a fair and reasonable administrative action,” he states.

He says that as a result of the tumult at the City and his two suspensions, his image and reputation have taken a hard hit and this has resulted in him becoming “a laughing stock on social and in printed media.”

Elections and Kanime

In his founding affidavit, Kahimise states that he wishes to highlight the “Kanime suspension” as it is relevant in his view to prove “malice and ulterior motives” of the third and eleventh respondents for pushing to suspend him.

The court papers indicate that these respondents are council and management committee member Moses Shiikwa, and Windhoek councillor Hileni Ulumbu respectively.

His affidavit further states that a majority of councillors and management committee members “were influenced by ulterior motives. These motives relate to them to at all costs reinstate Chief Kanime”.

He further claims that these councillors quashed a forensic report issued by PriceWaterhouseCoopers on Kanime “thereby prejudicing his on-going disciplinary hearing”.

The first respondent is the City of Windhoek, deputy mayor Teckla Uwanga the second, plus seven other councillors and management committee members, as well as the minister of urban and rural development Peya Mushelenga as the 12th and the labour commissioner as the 13th respondent.

Kahimise’s affidavits states that another “ulterior motive” of the council and management committee members is to dirty the reputations of mayor Muesee Kazapua and management committee chairperson Mathew Amadhila who both approved his study aid.

“Their aim is no doubt to stand for elections for the position of mayor and as management committee members. This self-serving and selfish conduct contravenes their code of conduct.”

Green light, red light

Kazapua in a brief supporting affidavit states that in his view the 5 November special council meeting at which Kahimise’s second suspension was approved “was improperly and unlawfully convened” and as a result all decisions taken there are invalid.

In her supporting affidavit, City of Windhoek councillor Brunhilde Cornelius highlights that at a special council meeting held on Monday, 5 November, where the second suspension was approved, a legal advisor and industrial relations officers informed all council members present that Kahimise was “in law, entitled to reasons and reasonable time and opportunity to adequately prepare” a presentation to halt his suspension.

Further, that council was advised that a suspension that does not comply with Clause 22 of the conditions of service “would be invalid and unlawful”.

Despite these warnings, Cornelius claims, after she and councillor Joseph Kauandenge had recused themselves from the meeting, the council recommended he be suspended.

Cornelius in her affidavit states that Fransina Kahunga, a councillor and the seventh respondent in the case, at the conclusion of the meeting and despite advice to the contrary, “moved a motion that Kahimise must be suspended regardless of such action being unlawful and invalid. She further asserted that whatever legal consequences would arise must follow thereafter.”

Kauandenge had already recused himself from the meeting earlier, after he became “agitated and angry” when some councillors are said to have accused Kahimise of being arrogant for instructing a legal practitioner to assist him instead of representing himself “like Kanime before council”.

The affidavit further claims that Ulumbu at the meeting “proposed to suspend Kahimise because Chief Kanime was likewise suspended”.

Kahimise is arguing that he be granted an urgent hearing on the basis that he was suspended without pay and is the sole breadwinner in his family and that without his salary he would in “all likelihood default and be declared insolvent”.

JANA-MARI SMITH