Decolonising the Namibian Constitution

If “One Namibia, One Nation” means anything, then the Government of the Republic of Namibia should function like a person with two hands. The right hand does not fight the left hand.

As our Oshiwambo elders say: "omunue gume ihagu tompola ona" — one finger cannot do without the other fingers.

Not as a “ruling party and opposition parties” government, where opposition parties are seen as inferior and their members treated as second-class citizens.

Yet 35 years after independence, we are still governing with one hand tied behind our back. We have reduced government to “ruling party” versus “opposition parties” — as if they are not all serving one body called the Government of the Republic of Namibia.

The problem is whether our government reflects the will of the electorate, and whether decisions are based on truth and facts, not the tyranny of numbers and emotions.

Today, decisions in Parliament and Cabinet are made by majority, not by evidence. Because 51% can vote anything through, research and empirical studies are ignored.  

The SA Constitutional Court dismissed Parliament’s vote to block President Ramaphosa’s impeachment because MPs used their majority to bury facts. The Court said: a majority cannot override constitutional duty.  

In Namibia, it is about party loyalty and party colour. The majority uses its numbers to suppress facts and calls it “majority rule”. That is not governance. That is rule by faction. This is the fundamental reason Namibian development and the economy remain stagnant.

In the current Parliament, the ruling party lost its 2/3 majority in the last National Assembly election. To date, no Bill has been passed.

Swapo politicians and some sections of the public are shifting blame and scapegoating opposition parties.

But the truth is simple: for years the ruling party used its majority to bulldoze any Bill without providing facts, supported by research and scientific evidence on the pros and cons to Namibian sovereignty.  

Today the will of the electorate has spoken at the ballot and ended that abuse of numbers. The writing is clear: numbers cannot be used to suppress truth with facts.

Scholar Mahmood Mamdani called it the “bifurcated state,” created under Jan Smuts—a divide-and-rule system meant to prevent unity of purpose and enable colonial exploitation and exclusion.

Smuts created a dual system: one superior and one subordinate, built along racial lines. After independence, we created the same dualism in politics: “ruling party” and “opposition party”. In some cases it is even called “government of Swapo”, implying that the Government of the Republic of Namibia belongs to the so-called ruling party.

In this system, opposition parties are seen as enemies of the nation and disruptors of government business, rather than as the other finger or hand — part of the same body.

In March 1990, we removed the colonial administrator, but we inherited their seats in the body politic and kept the colonial design: a fused executive and legislature, winner-takes-all.

"Kasipeli iniilongasha", we can only blame ourselves for not learning the lesson. Colonialism stood for greed, monopoly, exploitation and the exclusion of others — not only from politics, but also from economic emancipation.

Three amendments

Ministers should no longer be appointed from Parliament, and not only from the President’s party. The President should also no longer appoint the additional eight non-MP ministers.  

The President should appoint a Cabinet based on the proportional results of the presidential election, from recommended lists submitted by each political party. Parties will nominate experts and technocrats who are not MPs.

This ends the conflict of interest where one person makes laws in the morning and implements them in the afternoon. This was the case with the Marine Resources Act, where the then Minister, Bernard Esau, tabled, defended, and implemented the amendment to give himself power over fishing quotas. That concentration of power led to Fishrot, job losses, and the distribution of fishing quotas to comrades and politically connected individuals.

Amending these articles will restore true separation of powers and prevent the concentration of state power in a single individual.

Based on the 2024 presidential election results- 58% Swapo, 26% IPC, 5% and 11% for the others- the Cabinet should reflect that.  

It makes no sense to have two independent elections, yet appoint Cabinet from Parliament. Winner-takes-all works for one President. But appointing Cabinet from Parliament undermines separation of powers and the will of the electorate.  

In this proposal, the President still appoints and leads, but he governs with both hands — “ruling party and opposition parties” in Cabinet. This is nation-building, not party politics.

Add a Right to Evidence-Based Governance in Chapter

We must entrench a new fundamental right: “Every person has the right to have public decisions made based on verifiable facts, empirical research and scientific evidence. No law or policy shall be adopted without an independent impact assessment on Namibian sovereignty.”  

By placing this in Chapter 3, it becomes justiciable. If government ignores facts, citizens can take it to court. This forces the Legislature and Executive to argue with data — “truth with facts” — not with numbers and emotions.

This is a consensus Cabinet. If all parties are in Cabinet, you cannot just outvote them. You must convince them with correct data. The Auditor-General, Ombudsman, and Namibia Statistics Agency must also report to Cabinet and Parliament, and their findings must be debated before any vote.