Sackey, Job go head to head
13 February 2018 | Justice
In papers filed at the Windhoek High Court yesterday, Amupanda indicated through his counsel Kadhila Amoomo that he will be defending a claim filed by Shanghala on 4 December last year.
Shanghala, in his particulars, told the court that Amupanda had defamed him, calling him corrupt, accusing him of receiving kickbacks, engaging in criminal activities and having no moral fibre.
He is claiming N$500 000 in damages, along with costs on an attorney-client scale. Shanghala told the court that during a symposium on US attorney-generals, held in Doha, Qatar in November last year, Amupanda had posed questions to a panel during a breakaway session. During these questions, he had allegedly remarked “that the people of Namibia were shocked that the Namibian attorney-general is not a practising attorney and thus not subject to the rules of practice and ethical conduct pertaining to practising legal practitioners”.
Shanghala says Amupanda made comments regarding the British lawyers that were consulted on government's genocide reparations negotiations with Germany, saying that they had “pretended to work for 23 hours whilst it was biologically impossible to do so”.
Amupanda had also asked the panel's advice on corrupt attorney-generals.
Shanghala told the court Amupanda then took to social media and posted the following: “Session Two, we are doing a Case Study on US Attorney Generals. Insightful discussions that makes me agonize about a joke we have as Attorney General”. (sic)
Amupanda had also allegedly called Shanghala corrupt in a later posting.
On Twitter, Shanghala said Amupanda had tweeted a photo of him and deputy prime minister Netumbo Nandi Ndaitwah and wrote: “My son, haven't you stollen enough? PLEASE my son, it's enough. Don't steal anymore. If imaginations could become TRUTH!” (sic)
Later, on his Facebook page, Shanghala said Amupanda had posted “Sakeus Edward Shanghala: An Epitome and Symbol of corruption in Namibia. That he supports the man saves him.” (sic)
Shanghala told the court the “the content of the publications are false and defamatory making him out to be a corrupt, non-law-abiding citizen and unfit for his position, amongst others”.
Celeste Coetzee, of De Klerk, Horn and Coetzee, is representing Shanghala.