Governors can do with a bit of more truth

COME on, Swapo governors. It won’t do you any harm to tell the truth. These past two weeks have seen intensifying media reports on the upcoming local and regional council elections.

As a result some of the regional governors who are no longer standing on Swapo tickets have been quoted as stating that they are going into full-time farming, becoming full-time housewives, or going to concentrate on other personal issues.
As far as I can recall only one was on record as stating that he was ready to serve the party and the people in a different capacity. That ‘capacity’ was surely referring to the imminent appointment by President Hifikepunye Pohamba as regional governor with new and more powers.
I don’t understand why politicians find it difficult to tell the truth, even if it won’t hurt them. Especially those who hold responsible positions!
Why should dishonesty take the front seat when it comes to politicians?
In some countries, specifically in Europe, politicians have resigned after they were caught lying.
On the African continent our ‘elected liars’ regard it as some sort of sport or art to remain in office.
That is why there is a tale about an accident in which a plane, carrying politicians, crashed near a village. When the survivors reportedly approached the villagers for help their answer was a resounding “no”.
When a journalist asked the villagers why they ignored the fate of the politicians, one answered: “You never know when they tell the truth”.
There are of course professions where some regard it quite acceptable to lie.
Lawyers would fit in that category as they habitually substitute a ‘guilty’ plea with ‘not guilty’ when they defend rapists, murderers and other clients and use their talent of lying to generate income for their next splashy trip to Mauritius or some obscure place with a beach and lots of expensive drinks.
With reports going around – and to an extent confirmed by the Permanent Secretary of Local Government – that most of the governors will be appointed in a capacity equal to that of former regional commissioners, transparency should be paramount.
People who are about to be appointed in such capacities need to be trusted because their new duties require transparency.
When they continue with political lies which some used for gimmicking throughout their terms as governors, that is unacceptable.
Pathological liars have no place in regional leadership, especially since they will carry much of the dreams and hopes of the people through decentralisation of responsibilities.
What we need are people with gazillions of ideas to uplift the living standards of so many depressed rural populations.
Since Independence, most of our regional economies have struggled. The best among them only sputtered.
That is why anyone steering the regional ship will be more than a bootlicker or a ‘progressive’ pygmy who don’t think big and act as such.
Because of the many hurdles facing our regions, it will be suicidal to appoint people who just seek fame and fortune like bees seek honey. In other words people with the sole aim of staying in the limelight.
My understanding is that the commissioners/governors will have a skeleton staff of highly technically skilled people (some at the level of a Permanent Secretary) to assist them in their work.
Such skilled personnel will be expected to operate in tandem with already existing regional staff – something that needs very clear guidelines to avoid office conflicts.
While the idea behind the appointment of commissioners is a good one, former governors will be expected to work hard while keeping a low profile – something which might be a bit of a problem for those who have become self-styled demigods of regions.
Their new duties will be true to the fact that leadership can’t be faked for long. And they shouldn’t transform those offices into retirement villages.
Maybe, while we are at it, since the President seems to show increased powers, he should think of ‘real experts’ when appointments are made for the skeleton staff instead of using political affiliation as the main benchmark.

The rise of uxoricides

FIVE years ago, Judge Kato van Niekerk imposed a 20-year sentence on Rehoboth resident Prollius van Zyl for killing his wife after a heavy drinking spree. For outsiders the marriage appeared happy but was marked by several incidents of violence even though Van Zyl told the court repeatedly that he loved his wife and had been intent on saving his marriage.

During the hearing it was clear that Van Zyl was a devoted and loving father, and a husband who liked helping his wife with household duties such as cooking – but when he drank, a hidden capacity for violence tended to come to the fore. Ultimately it resulted in a bloody end to the marriage.
Over the past couple of months, we have witnessed a disturbing trend of a sudden increase in similar uxoricides – men killing their wives.
There is also what others refer to as familicide – a multiple-victim homicide in which the killer’s spouse and one or more children are slain.
Such violent acts are almost exclusively perpetrated by men.
In most cases people believe they are an unintended result of violence that went too far, but spouse murder cannot be and should not be understood as loss of control or a moment of insanity.
I believe most of the cases are deliberate and have been thought about over time.
Many such culprits have reached a stage of readiness to destroy another even if it means destroying themselves.
But before I go that route, there are also those men who believe that their victims could not persist or cope in his absence and regard their deaths as ‘necessary’ or perhaps even ‘merciful’.
In both cases, though, it seems that the killers have some sort of feeling of entitlement to decide on the victim’s fate.
The many cases I’ve referred to are almost entirely linked to violent interpersonal conflicts between a couple – whether married or not – and shootings constitute a substantial proportion.
These men display a hostile masculine proprietary mindset – in other words they think they own their spouses.
In some instances they profess a grievance against the wife and this is usually about alleged infidelities or her intentions to terminate their relationship.
In a recent instance a man travelled all the way to the North from Walvis Bay to kill the woman who had fled from him.
According to neighbours and friends, it was the second time she had run away from him.
This made me think that some of the murders could be a substitute for either divorce or separation.
When one speaks to some of the relatives and friends afterwards, they recount how the boyfriend or husband had threatened: “I’ll kill you and the kids if you ever leave me”. In other words, they can’t picture her with anyone else.
They are using murder as a way to end a rocky and unhappy relationship or one in which the partner opted out. This leave others shocked and in a state of disbelief.
But most the culprits are prone to fits of rage prior to the incidents and have a history of violence, while there are also traces of being obsessed with controlling the partner.
These are men who will have a knife at her throat one minute, and the next minute will be kissing the ground on which she walks while pleading for forgiveness.
Clearly, based on the sudden increase in the number of uxoricides over the past couple of years, there is a need to ask why: What is wrong in our society? What can we do to curb it?
If we turn a blind eye to what is happening around us, we are likely to see more of the killings.
There is a need for parents to sensitise their children (especially boys), society to help educate young men and Government and other institutions such as the Churches to step up their campaigns against violence.
We should not only embark on demonstrations but, among others, educate men that life does not end when relationships are broken, or help them to accept that they do not own their spouses or their destinies.
I believe even politicians, some of whom many worship, can get more involved by utilising their platforms to talk about these issues, instead of ranting at colonialists, imperialists and other -list(er)s!

NUNW Congress: Issues Triumphed Over Personality

FOR the first time in many years, Namibian workers have spoken not only loudly but also demonstrated that they can take their destiny in own hands. Worker issues triumphed over personality at last weekend’s National Union of Namibian Workers (NUNW) congress.

While many thought that history would repeating itself and that the Secretary General of the NUNW Evilastus Kaaronda was about to be kicked off the podium at the congress, as they did with Peter Naholo five years ago, the workers’ voice kicked in and the planned hostile takeover by a group which has been flexing its muscle at both industrial union and at federation level failed.
Naholo was sacked after he dared to differ in public with a group aligned to former President Sam Nujoma. That group included the likes of former NUNW president Alpheus Muheua and Peter Nevonga of the Namibia Public Workers Union (Napwu). Interestingly Kaaronda was also in that camp and assumed the mantle after Naholo left.
Naholo took issue with Muheua and his group after they backed Nujoma’s account of the events of April 1 1989 and was shown the door. Shortly thereafter Naholo resigned from Swapo and joined the Rally for Democracy and Progress.
His resignation was further proof that rifts in the NUNW often reflect power struggles in the ruling party.
That is because the NUNW, Namibia’s largest umbrella group of unions, is not only affiliated to Swapo but also has voting rights at ruling party congresses.
Because of that, since Independence, workers’ issues have not always received top priority at the NUNW congresses, but were overshadowed by Swapo political intrigues.
Delegates mainly arrived at congresses ready to fight over leadership of the umbrella body knowing that the group which takes over the engine room will automatically ensure 15 votes for a particular clique in the ruling party.
That was also one of the main reasons why so many ‘men in dark glasses’ (intelligence) were present at the congress. They were there to maneouvre things to ensure a victory for the candidate of someone’s choice.
But, having campaigned in the region, prior to the congress, the group underestimated the power of the working class and believed that they could bulldoze their candidates through.
However, it was not to be this time around.
First, there was a clear division among those who were previously united. The outcome of the voting showed that there was no block voting by industrial unions.
In the past, Kaaronda would have been an ideal candidate for Nevonga and the congress would have been a formality.
Over the last weekend, it was a matter of dog eat dog as former allies spent hours campaigning against each other. Nevonga was backing a different horse and Kaaronda had to rely on the support of the workers. He played his cards well. Or, rather, he articulated workers’ concerns well.
Having picked up on the vibes well in advance, Kaaronda spoke openly about issues that concerned workers like the Basic Income Grant, Government Institutions Pension Fund, Black Economic Empowerment (BEE) vs Transformation of Economic and Social Empowerment Framework (TESEF), high unemployment rate and the Chinese investors, among others.
Tired of being used and abused, workers responded positively.
They had enough because, over the past five years, Ramatex closed down and it resulted in a loss of around 4 000 jobs while some unionists in cahoots with the new predatory elite syphoned workers money at institutions such as GIPF for own gain.
Even the central executive committee, which decided to pull out of BIG to please President Hifikepunye Pohamba, was given a vote of no confidence after the congress directed the NUNW secretariat to rejoin the poverty alleviation initiative.
Workers feel unemployment every day. It is their sons, daughters, wives, husbands and relatives who remain jobless and must live off their meagre salaries.
They were no longer the complacent, disempowered and unorganised crowd which would normally be coerced into and be limited to slogan-shouting but they pressed for debates and decisions on policies that will benefit the working class. If a similar trend prevailed with industrial union congresses as happened at last weekend’s watershed congress of the NUNW, this will only benefit the workers. A similar attitude at the congresses of affiliate unions can surely only benefit the workers.
In the meantime, Kaaronda and others who were voted into office must take their mandate seriously and use the next five years to the benefit of workers.
For starters, they need to relook at companies in which workers have shares and how they benefit the members. For too long only an elite group have benefitted from such companies while workers do not even have a special fund to rely on when they lose jobs.

* This column also appeared in The Namibian.

Of national days, ‘comrades’ and ‘traitors’

I MISSED last week’s Heroes Day celebrations. No, to put it more bluntly, I deliberately avoided attending any events and I don’t feel guilty or unpatriotic.

Swapo has hijacked national days and they have become platforms for the party’s rhetoric.

More disturbing is the fact that some of those who address such gatherings regard themselves more as ‘heroes’ than many of those whose contributions remain unacknowledged by the powers-that-be and who have thus become ‘nobodies’.

According to Tuesday’s New Era, David Namwandi, new Deputy Minister of Education had the following to say at the Omaruru Heroes’ Day commemoration:

“Comrades don’t be confused by some politicians who don’t have (a) long-term vision, let alone strategies to rule this country. Swapo and Swapo alone can claim to be the authentic representative of the people of this country, because it has liberated this country from the yoke of colonialism, that is a fact.”

First, if it was a day for comrades, why make it a public holiday? Why not call it a ‘Swapo day’ and let others, including businesses which could otherwise have remained open to make money, continue with their daily operations. As it was last week, any business which operated on that day had to pay their staff overtime because it was a public holiday.

Others, which opted to close for the day, obviously lost out on some business.

Yet we see a national leader addressing the gathering with words such as ‘comrades’. I thought Namwandi, being a founder of a university, would know better.

He was obviously addressing a Swapo gathering and not people who attended a national day to remember why they no longer have Casspirs parked on the fringes of their rallies and can move freely within the country as opposed to being beaten up if found in the centre of a town after sunset.

Of course, many who attended the event were Swapo sympathisers and members. They have come to accept that such days are actually ‘Swapo days’.

That is why their leaders arrive fully clad in party colours and greet them with the ‘mannetjie sign’ as they emerge from Government-owned vehicles.

The NBC TV had similar visuals on the Tuesday evening bulletin with a Heroes’ Day event addressed by NUNW acting president David Namalenga, who was telling people to vote Swapo in the upcoming elections.

Again, I wondered whether it was Heroes’ Day event or a Swapo day.

My contribution to Namibia’s Independence was very insignificant. At one stage I was dismissed from a school for refusing instructions and attending student political meetings until the early hours of the morning when I was supposed to be in hostel learning or sleeping. That’s my only claim to fame which, obviously, is not really worth mentioning.

But I am aware of many stalwarts inside Namibia who opposed the abominable system of apartheid by leading us as students to class boycotts; teachers who refused to feed us with Bantu education; parents who lost their children when they abandoned school and went into exile without returning; those whose houses were, night in and night out, raided by the apartheid forces apparently looking for ‘terrorists’; those who sacrificed their lives by harbouring and feeding known political activists; girls who were brutally raped by both sides in the struggle; and many who criss-crossed Namibia in the late evenings to hold clandestine meetings to mobilise people.

Many others were detained for turning their church sermons into political speeches while others, like The Namibian , were petrol-bombed and their staff often harassed and arrested.

Today, many of those nameless and ordinary people are regarded as unpatriotic, puppets and traitors just because they question certain things and opted to stick by their principles instead of being dragged into name-calling or mudslinging or refused to become lapdogs, like The Namibian.

Yet there is a group of people who have decided among themselves whose contribution was worthier than others in opposing apartheid rule. They are ably assisted by some who conveniently weren’t part of the struggle in the past but now know more than many who were actually involved.

Not only are their vehicles plastered with Swapo colours but they have the audacity to downplay the role others played.

In most instances, they use platforms at national days to create the impression that they are more heroic than others.

Whenever they have nothing to say or lack something of substance, they jump on the bandwagon many of us have grown tired to.

I wonder whether they are not intellectually bankrupt!

Those are the people who keep some of us away from national days.

Time To Incorporate The Youth Is Now!

youthIN the next few months political party leaders will have the daunting task of finalising their lists of candidates for the upcoming local and regional authority elections.

Sections, branches and districts have started submitting names of their preferred candidates and some wannabes are also pushing their luck by forcing themselves on people through different manoeuvres such as smear campaigns against opponents as well as holding party meetings clandestinely with selected supporters to rubber-stamp their candidacy.
The time will also be an ideal opportunity to not only reflect on the achievements of the candidates at local and regional level but also afford members a chance to deliberate and consider how to blend in youth, more especially young women, into mainstream politics.
The retirement of former Deputy Prime Minister Dr Libertina Amathila earlier this year after 20 years in Government and many years of hard work at party level was coming for some time and was thus no surprise to all when it happened. She was, however, the first of a generation that is on its way out and needs to be replaced with those of impeccable quality.
Amathila was a sober-minded, stable and committed stalwart and Swapo, as well as opposition political parties who intend to rule Namibia one day, need to groom such cadres as they did yesterday.
I am referring to people who will not struggle to adapt to the challenges facing our communities at local and regional level and who will be able to mix leadership with management.
We have had enough of young supposed firebrands who offer nothing other than party slogans but lack direction and maturity.
And with youth I mean those up to the age of 35. I choose that age limit reluctantly because the national youth policy has it that way. But then we also know whose brainchild it was and that Swapo also have it so in their constitution!
Somehow I have noticed a gradual alienation of young women in Namibia’s political landscape and when parties refer to the youth, they mostly tend to pinpoint to the wannabe young lions they have churned out.
I am no proponent of women empowerment if it is purely based on the number rather than the quality. But we definitely need to reflect on sexual politics.
My input, however, is more for young people generally against the background of the dearth of new blood as seen in last year’s national elections.
I believe that the next five years will be crucial for blending in the youth into mainstream politics.
It is a fact that the younger they are the less they will struggle to adapt to challenges.
Of course, they will lack authority at the beginning but they can use the time to build on their experience. Thus the trial and error won’t be as public as that of known national leaders whose mistakes can be seen by all and who regularly come under the microscope due to their public office.
After five years such young leaders will be able to lead with authority and provide energy, vision and influence. This should be done through noncoercive means and not like the current pushing and pulling of the people.
Again, I do not mean that elders lack energy and vision. Some do, but not all!
I believe we have youth who, with time on their side, will be able to mobilise people to face problems. Youth who will challenge and help the communities.
Just last week the Government announced that it had downgraded some local authorities.
It is no secret that some of the downgraded ones had been struggling for years and marked with such things as corruption and mismanagement. Others, of which Keetmanshoop is the most appropriate example, spent more time on infighting (physical and verbal). They mislead instead of lead!
Such leaders have had their time and need to be replaced by those who can direct disciplined attention to issues and bring back a sense of hope among the communities.
Of course, not all youth are disciplined and have leadership characters. Just look at the ‘struggle kids’, for instance, who should have done better because of the input their parents had in the country’s liberation as well as some corrupt young managers at known institutions.
But there are gems out there ready to be unearthed and released.
They are in regions – some doing voluntary work, quietly sweating with fire in their bellies – and ready to explode their talents if given the chance.
While such youth will be active, seniors will be able to have time to reflect and guide them into a new era. As such the youth won’t need to reinvent things and will also be able to avoid falling in the same traps.
We cannot afford to just see the Libertina Amathilas of this world quietly remove themselves into the obscurity of their farms while our youth dwell in the unknown without guidance. Let’s blend in the youth, even if it is one or two on parties’ local authority lists of five.

Police’s Protest Ban Designed To Stifle Rights

MY sincere apologies to the oppressed people of Swaziland and thousands of others from countries such as Zimbabwe who came to Namibia with the hope of getting their voices heard through a peaceful demonstration.

I am embarrassed, but at the same time also saddened, by the decision taken by our Police to ban demonstrations where you had planned to air your legitimate concerns about human rights violations by mainly securocrats back home.
I know that SADC meetings are not just about human rights issues in Zimbabwe and Swaziland. Our leaders spent hours discussing pertinent concerns such as electricity for the region, food security, regional integration, job creation and a new customs union. Some other issues were on the table.
While I appreciate the discussions as well as the time spent on preparing the summit, I was very depressed by the extent to which our Police went to silence the voice of the masses.
The Minister of Safety knows, as do the rest of the Cabinet and top Police officers, that the ban on demonstrations announced very late last week was a calculated move aimed at stifling the voices of the masses and had almost zilch to do with the availability of the officers to ensure the safety of the demonstrators.
I use the term ‘calculated’ because the ban was issued very late on Thursday and hardly gave any challenger time to approach the courts before this week.
Secondly, the Police knew very well that they had no powers to ban a demonstration for the reasons they gave.
In fact, in 1997, following several anti-Government demonstrations, former President Sam Nujoma announced a ban on all demonstrations not authorised by the Police but there was a legal challenge which nullified the decision. One of them was against a planned demonstration by the Himba people who were opposing the construction of the Epupa dam.
The Namibian Police probably took a leaf out of the books of their counterparts in South Africa last year when the Tshwane Metro police refused to give Zimbabwean opposition Movement for Democratic Change a go-ahead to stage a demonstration on the sidelines of the SADC emergency summit on Zimbabwe in Pretoria.
There were reports that the Namibian ban was mainly instigated by the fact that the demonstrations were initiated by the opposition Rally for Democracy and Progress who wanted to apparently embarrass the Government.
Whether the demonstration was instigated by RDP, MDC, any other political party, or was just a move by furious masses yearning for change, is not the issue for me.
What the Police did was to disrespect the same laws they are trying to enforce on people!
They knew very well from previous experience that the courts would declare their action invalid but they went ahead to declare a ban on demonstrations. They knew that, if anybody wanted to challenge their decision, they would have to approach the courts and that there was a likelihood that such a hearing would only take place a day or two after the summit.
While many would probably find the Police action clever in this respect, it brought to the fore a vexatious disrespect for the laws by people who are entrusted to enforce them.
Police chief General Sebastian Ndeitunga argued, through his lawyer Gerson Hinda, that the move was just a “limitation” and not a ban.
For me the approach was as an ostrich-head-in-the-sand one which, in similar instances over the years, gave more power to thuggish rulers to continue oppressing people.
For instance, someone who rules Africa’s last absolute monarchy as his own personal fiefdom got protection and was thus left with an arrogant impression that the rest of SADC agrees with the spate of human rights abuses occurring in Swaziland.
These are the same people who are dragging the reputation and image of SADC down.
SADC Inc.’s success depends on tackling, among others, human rights issues, instead of unholy alliances with one another, and the actions of our Police did not help much in this regard.

SADC doesn’t get it about people’s rights

THIS week Police in Swaziland arrested a man for making photocopies of an article in a South African newspaper that detailed a royal sex scandal which had shaken the small kingdom.

A plainclothes police officer overheard the man requesting photocopies of an article about an alleged love affair between the country’s justice minister and one of King Mswati III’s wives and charged him for copyright violation.
Subsequently the police raided the home of the man to find the original article.
In Swaziland the king remains the law, and political organisations have been outlawed since 1973.
Last week South African ace investigative reporter Mzilikazi wa Africa of Sunday Times was arrested for possession of what police said was a fraudulent letter of resignation from Mpumalanga Premier David Mabuza to President Jacob Zuma.
That was three days after he broke a story about the rental of new police headquarters at a cost of N$500 million without following the usual tender procedures.
These are but two incidents which show the disrespect governments in southern Africa have towards the freedom of expression of their people.
Back home in Namibia, spying on others has reached peak fever in recent months.
This after Parliament passed the Information and Communications Bill last year.
The Minister of Information described the bill, which became an Act, as "progressive and popular in the eyes of many people" and even said Namibia had been commended internationally.
According to him the Act will have many benefits – chief among them the safety and security of the country and the protection of its citizens.
The Minister also told the Swapo party newspaper, Namibia Today, that "the requirement for a warrant to conduct interception is an absolute necessity based on the law that gives the right to intercept".
In short, any interception of information was to go through the court.
That, however, has not been the case in the past few months.
Many people I have spoken to have been tapped and they, like me, do not believe that there have been any warrant issued by a court.
What concerns me most is that the interception of information has picked up after discussions around the succession debate in the ruling party intensified.
This while the proponents of the bill argued that the main intention behind the interception was to curtail cyber-crime and terrorism. Critics always disputed this.
Various Swapo leaders have ‘spies’ in the country’s intelligence service and such people work around the clock to monitor the activities of others and feed them with information.
It has reached a stage where so-called comrades do not trust each other, cannot say certain things over telephones or on cellphones, and have ‘invented’ vocabulary to avoid the intelligence picking up on their discussions through ‘key’ words.
How such interceptions benefit the country, I have yet to comprehend.
What worries me most is that there seems to be no watchdog for those who watch others (or listen to the conversations of others) and information they pick up generally spreads like a veld fire among a smaller clique of friends but also reach those who were not supposed to be privy!
I have heard of an incident where one person sent an e-mail to another but it was intercepted and shared with the subject of discussion. The subject of discussion promptly replied to the sender and left the comrade in a state of shock.
Worst of all, the person did not hide the fact about the source of the leaked information and informed the comrade that he/she had ‘boys’ in intelligence!
All the above cases are a direct result of laws enacted by SADC governments under the pretext of peace, safety and security.
There can be no reference to democracy in the same breath as safety and security, or so we have learnt through experiences of citizens and journalists in the region.
And it all started with a symptomatic silence on who ought to challenge such behaviour by our governments.
When challenged by civil society and the media, the majority of the governments resort to the tired old clichés of declaring those who criticise such moves as unpatriotic while they continue to bully them.
I hope that as the leaders reflect on 30 years of SADC’s existence, some sanity will prevail and there will be time to ponder about the disrespect some of the member countries have shown towards protocols and declarations they are signatory to such as the one on culture, information and sport which, among others, commit them to the free flow of information and the freedom and independence of the media.
Sidestepping this will once again give others a licence to continue acting at will.

* This column first appeared in The Namibian