EDITORIAL: Defending the right to defence
The current debate swirling around lawyer Sisa Namandje’s role in the Enercon–Namcor scandal reveals more than public anger. It exposes a fundamental misunderstanding of the very principles that keep our legal system upright.
Instead of hurling suspicion at his professional conduct, Namibians should pause and remind themselves of a basic truth: the rule of law does not bend to politics, public emotion, or even to outrage. It bends only to justice. And justice demands that lawyers be free to represent their clients without fear of political intimidation or social stigma. If this freedom is lost, then so too is the fairness of our courts.
True, Namandje is a prominent Swapo leader. Critics allege a conflict of interest, insisting that his political standing should bar him from taking on certain cases. But this criticism collapses under the weight of principle. The right to legal representation belongs to every accused person - whether saint or scoundrel and it is the duty of every lawyer to provide it without prejudice. That duty does not evaporate because the lawyer happens to be politically active.
To demand that Namandje stop defending clients against the state is to misunderstand what the “state” actually is in criminal matters. The state is not Swapo. It is not even government. It is the prosecuting authority acting on behalf of society, and it is the judiciary ensuring fairness through due process. When Namandje challenges the state in court, he is not fighting against a political party - he is fulfilling his professional obligation to test the state’s case.
We must also reckon with the dangerous conflation of “state” and “government.” Our democratic system deliberately separates these spheres to guard against tyranny. The government governs. The judiciary adjudicates. And the law belongs to the people.
Instead of hurling suspicion at his professional conduct, Namibians should pause and remind themselves of a basic truth: the rule of law does not bend to politics, public emotion, or even to outrage. It bends only to justice. And justice demands that lawyers be free to represent their clients without fear of political intimidation or social stigma. If this freedom is lost, then so too is the fairness of our courts.
True, Namandje is a prominent Swapo leader. Critics allege a conflict of interest, insisting that his political standing should bar him from taking on certain cases. But this criticism collapses under the weight of principle. The right to legal representation belongs to every accused person - whether saint or scoundrel and it is the duty of every lawyer to provide it without prejudice. That duty does not evaporate because the lawyer happens to be politically active.
To demand that Namandje stop defending clients against the state is to misunderstand what the “state” actually is in criminal matters. The state is not Swapo. It is not even government. It is the prosecuting authority acting on behalf of society, and it is the judiciary ensuring fairness through due process. When Namandje challenges the state in court, he is not fighting against a political party - he is fulfilling his professional obligation to test the state’s case.
We must also reckon with the dangerous conflation of “state” and “government.” Our democratic system deliberately separates these spheres to guard against tyranny. The government governs. The judiciary adjudicates. And the law belongs to the people.
Comments
Namibian Sun
No comments have been left on this article