Open letter to Nust acting vice chancellor, Prof. Andrew Niikondo

As General Carl von Clausewitz once properly put it in 1830: “We are not at war with the opinions of the closet, we are at war with armed opinions” The ‘armed punitive opinions’ in your suspension letter to Ms Hilma Nandjigwa on the 23 April bear’s reference as it is indeed weaponized against conventional wisdom, her reputation, hard earned professional career, well-being, character, dignity and family name inadvertently dragged into politics of gossip mills within the NUST community and in public.

Your disconcerting piece of suspension theatre is not merely an administrative communication but a clear statement that NUST has a violent culture and it has become a volatile institution shaped by personal corrupt interests.

Due to your office’s shear arrogance of refusing to grant me any formal audience as an ordinary citizen empowered by the Access to Information Act of 2022, I continue to seek clarification on Ms Nandjigwa’s “armed opinion suspension”, therefore you left me with no choice but to join your “inevitable war” and address your office on this public platform because I can no longer allow long-serving, dedicated employees like Ms Nandjigwa to be continuously treated as scapegoats within NUST “armed opinions”.

Your office's proposition of diagnosing a staff member for psychological assessment without medical credentials in your briefcase and suspending her arbitrarily is illegal and possesses chaotic energy. “Chiefs of NUST fiefdom”, for your own information, are also bound by Namibian Constitution Article 18 to ensure fair administrative actions, accountability, transparency, and good governance.

It has now become a customary theatrical script page of NUST “Generals” to thumb-suck and suspend Ms Nandjigwa without following any reliance, justification or comprehensible rationality whatsoever on labour procedures.

The fact that she didn't commit any crime or fail in her duties means it is high time that NUST, as a public institution, adhered to procedural rationality rather than to emotionally charged decisions, especially from a premier higher-learning institution such as this. “Your” NUST non-constitutional footing theatre in which Ms Nandjigwa has been treated in a willy-nilly fashion is fundamentally flawed, insurmountable and unacceptable.

The unanswered questions from the 2023 Open Letter.

All serious concerns raised in my Open Letter to then Vice-Chancellor Dr Erold Naomab, published in the Namibian Sun on 6 December 2023, including the 1.8 million financial irregularities affecting Ms Nandjigwa's well-being, remain unanswered. Regarding the implications of the requested medical assessment in the suspension letter, Ms Nandjigwa provided a psychological assessment clearing her. Is NUST ready to compensate for the continuous reputational damage it inflicted on her character?

While accusing her of psychological anomalies, NUST sponsored her postgraduate studies, awarded her a forensic audit scholarship to study at a South African University, and recently awarded her a certificate of high performance. Yet, her questions on financial maladministration prompt calls for evaluation. What a contradiction!

Reimbursement of Incurred Costs

In 2023, NUST HR summoned Ms Nandjigwa's family members, including me and our 83-year-old father, whom I transported from the north, and me.

It later appeared to be a clandestine attempt to use family members to bless the occasion, fortifying NUST's ploy and rubber-stamping a kangaroo-court-style dismissal process.

Unfortunately, our conscience and logic prevailed. I therefore now request that NUST fully cover the travelling, accommodation and time expenses we incurred in that process.

Please point to the NUST executive ethics code or point to the applicable Public Service Code of Conduct upon which your office based the tailoring “patchwork” suspension theatre of Ms Hilma Nandjigwa.

Ms Nandjigwa decided not to sign documents worth 3.4 million, as these had already been approved by her supervisors within Finance on ITS, as per your delegation of authority. She cannot, however, not endorse at her level what her supervisors have already approved on ITS.

By deciding not to sign that documentation worth 3.4 million, she not only performed her duty but also blocked a potentially fraudulent or irregular financial flow that was being "pushed" through four layers of management. Is the Vice Chancellor’s office aware, and does this flag her as psychologically vulnerable?

Discrimination on Grounds of Conscience

(Article 21(1)(b)) Ms Nandjigwa's traits of honesty, outspokenness, and the ability to bring order to chaos stem from our esteemed family values.

She is punished for her conscience differing from that of her supervisors. The Constitution guarantees freedom of thought and belief.

Where do you draw the line between acceptable conscience and suspension? How does NUST embrace diversity in line with its values?

What does the institution’s official Wellness Policy (or Employee Assistance Programme) dictate in terms of procedure, support mechanisms, confidentiality, and due process? How does the approach taken in Ms Nandjigwa’s case align with that policy? Ms Nandjigwa’s long service to NUST deserves far better than the armed opinion treatment she has received.

Since your office denied and ignored my request for your audience, like in the case of your predecessor, be assured, as the incumbent, that I shall seek just and equitable remedies to disarm the opinionated suspension proposition.

Yours in Justice for Ms Nandjigwa, Tobias Nande Nandjigwa, Concerned Family Member, Iithindi village, Elim, Omusati region