\'No specific rules compelling ministers to respond within a set timeframe\'
The National Assembly has conceded that it lacks a formal mechanism to deal with the growing backlog of unanswered parliamentary questions — a loophole critics say undermines accountability and weakens legislative oversight of the Executive.
In a written response to Namibian Sun, National Assembly spokesperson Sacky Kadhikwa confirmed that while Namibia’s Constitution and Standing Rules impose attendance obligations on both ministers and Members of Parliament (MPs), there are no specific rules compelling ministers to respond within a set timeframe or ensuring follow-ups on deferred questions.
“The Standing Rules do not provide a procedure to manage backlogs of unanswered questions resulting from absenteeism,” Kadhikwa said. “There are no Standing Rules that set time limits for responses, prioritise unanswered questions, or require reporting on outstanding replies.”
Rules ensure attendance but not timely accountability
Kadhikwa noted that the Constitution and parliamentary rules clearly define attendance obligations.
Cabinet ministers are required to attend sittings and respond to questions under Articles 40(e) and 41, while MPs who miss ten consecutive sittings without approved leave automatically lose their seats under Article 48(1)(e).
However, these rules focus on physical presence rather than performance or timeliness.
Parliament requires a quorum of 49 voting members for decisions and 26 for other business, while Chief Whips ensure members’ attendance.
Yet, no mechanism exists to monitor whether questions are answered promptly or meaningfully.
Critics argue that the absence of deadlines has weakened Parliament’s oversight role.
By the time questions are eventually answered, circumstances often have changed — making responses irrelevant or outdated.
“Delayed answers defeat the purpose of parliamentary scrutiny,” one observer said, adding that the time lag allows ministries to escape real-time accountability.
Opposition condemns ministers’ absenteeism
Last month, leader of the official opposition in parliament, Imms Nashinge of the Independent Patriots for Change (IPC), launched a scathing attack on ministers who consistently fail to attend question sessions. Nashinge accused ministers of “crippling Parliament and denying Namibians accountability,” saying that the delays in addressing time-bound questions were “a disservice to the people of Namibia.”
While the Committee on Privileges may act against MPs who repeatedly miss sittings, there are no comparable sanctions for ministers who ignore or delay parliamentary questions.
With parliament now acknowledging this gap, calls are growing for reforms to introduce clear timelines, enforce follow-ups, and strengthen the National Assembly’s ability to ensure timely and transparent governance.
In a written response to Namibian Sun, National Assembly spokesperson Sacky Kadhikwa confirmed that while Namibia’s Constitution and Standing Rules impose attendance obligations on both ministers and Members of Parliament (MPs), there are no specific rules compelling ministers to respond within a set timeframe or ensuring follow-ups on deferred questions.
“The Standing Rules do not provide a procedure to manage backlogs of unanswered questions resulting from absenteeism,” Kadhikwa said. “There are no Standing Rules that set time limits for responses, prioritise unanswered questions, or require reporting on outstanding replies.”
Rules ensure attendance but not timely accountability
Kadhikwa noted that the Constitution and parliamentary rules clearly define attendance obligations.
Cabinet ministers are required to attend sittings and respond to questions under Articles 40(e) and 41, while MPs who miss ten consecutive sittings without approved leave automatically lose their seats under Article 48(1)(e).
However, these rules focus on physical presence rather than performance or timeliness.
Parliament requires a quorum of 49 voting members for decisions and 26 for other business, while Chief Whips ensure members’ attendance.
Yet, no mechanism exists to monitor whether questions are answered promptly or meaningfully.
Critics argue that the absence of deadlines has weakened Parliament’s oversight role.
By the time questions are eventually answered, circumstances often have changed — making responses irrelevant or outdated.
“Delayed answers defeat the purpose of parliamentary scrutiny,” one observer said, adding that the time lag allows ministries to escape real-time accountability.
Opposition condemns ministers’ absenteeism
Last month, leader of the official opposition in parliament, Imms Nashinge of the Independent Patriots for Change (IPC), launched a scathing attack on ministers who consistently fail to attend question sessions. Nashinge accused ministers of “crippling Parliament and denying Namibians accountability,” saying that the delays in addressing time-bound questions were “a disservice to the people of Namibia.”
While the Committee on Privileges may act against MPs who repeatedly miss sittings, there are no comparable sanctions for ministers who ignore or delay parliamentary questions.
With parliament now acknowledging this gap, calls are growing for reforms to introduce clear timelines, enforce follow-ups, and strengthen the National Assembly’s ability to ensure timely and transparent governance.
Comments
Namibian Sun
No comments have been left on this article