EDITORIAL: If the law breeds suspicion, parliament must change it

The fierce debate in parliament over the nomination of Gerson Sindano as the proposed chairperson of the Electoral Commission of Namibia (ECN) has exposed an issue far bigger than the suitability of any individual nominee.

It has exposed a law that may no longer inspire universal confidence.

Given the central role the ECN plays in safeguarding Namibia's democracy, there should be no room for uncertainty about how its leaders are selected.

But if the controversy stems from the law itself, then parliament should stop blaming individuals and instead fix the legislation.

The current legal framework empowers the president to appoint ECN commissioners after receiving nominations through the prescribed process. It is one that parliament itself enacted through legislation.

If members of parliament now believe that the system leaves too much room for subjectivity or creates a perception that the executive has undue influence over the country's electoral referee, they possess the very instrument needed to correct it. They can amend the law. 

Laws are not sacred texts. They evolve as democracies mature and as experience reveals weaknesses in existing systems. If the current appointment model no longer commands broad public confidence, legislators should have the courage to reform it rather than merely criticise its outcomes.

One option worth considering is to transfer greater responsibility for appointing ECN commissioners to parliament itself. As a body comprising representatives from across the political spectrum, parliament is arguably better placed to oversee appointments to institutions whose credibility depends on public confidence across party lines.

Such a model would not eliminate disagreement, but it would broaden ownership of the process and reduce perceptions that appointments are driven by a single political office.

If the law breeds suspicion, then parliament has both the power and the responsibility to rewrite it.