Allexer Namundjembo
The High Court of Namibia has ordered the immediate reinstatement of two Keetmanshoop municipality management committee members who were removed through a vote of no confidence last month.
In a ruling delivered on Monday before justice Thomas Masuku, the court granted urgent interim relief to applicants Easter Isaak and Anneliza Knaus, effectively halting the implementation of the municipality’s decision to remove them from office.
The dispute stems from resolutions adopted by the Keetmanshoop municipal council on 7 May and 4 June, in which a vote of no confidence was passed against the two councillors, leading to their removal from the management committee.
However, the court interdicted the municipality, its management committee, and other respondents from enforcing or giving effect to those resolutions pending the finalisation of the main application.
“The respondents are hereby interdicted and restrained… from implementing, enforcing, giving effect to, or executing the decisions whereby a vote of no confidence was passed against the applicants,” reads the court order seen by the Windhoek Observer.
The court further barred authorities from swearing in any new members to replace the applicants, stating that the respondents are restrained “from proceeding with, facilitating, or giving effect to the swearing-in of any persons appointed or elected as new members of the management committee.”
In addition, Isaak and Knaus have been restored to their positions with immediate effect.
“The applicants are hereby restored and reinstated to their respective positions and seats as members of the management committee, pending the final determination” of the main case, the order states.
Justice Masuku also condoned the applicants’ non-compliance with procedural rules, allowing the matter to be heard on an urgent basis.
“The applicants’ non-compliance with the rules is hereby condoned,” the order reads.
Costs related to the urgent application were granted in favour of the applicants, although the scale of those costs will be determined during the hearing of the main review.
In a founding affidavit submitted before the court, Isaak said that he was removed as a member of the management committee by the council. He stated that the purported removal is subject to the application.
“I have been duly authorised to depose to this affidavit on behalf of the second applicant in view of the similar facts in support of this application, and I have been duly authorised by the second applicant to institute this review application. I refer to the confirmatory affidavit of the second applicant,” the affidavit reads.
The affidavit further stated that the council still maintains the ultimate powers to deal with the matter, and it can only do so after the management committee submits a resolution or report at the next ordinary council meeting for notice, ratification, or formal approval.
“I believe that as chairperson of the management committee I did not submit any report (in terms of Standing Rule 21) on the motion at the next ordinary meeting, nor did I delegate any member of the management committee to submit a report on the motion. I shall revert to this in due course,” the affidavit stated.
The case cites multiple respondents, including the Keetmanshoop municipal council, its management structures, several individual councillors, the minister of urban and rural development, and the magistrate for the Keetmanshoop district.
The affidavit also indicated that, at the ordinary council meeting of 31 March, the motion of no confidence was not read by the chief executive officer as per Rule 19(2) of the Standing Rules.
“The minutes of the ordinary council meeting of 31 March 2026 reflect that the motion of no confidence was dealt with by the fifth respondent instead of the third respondent, who was the acting chief executive officer,” the document reads.
The matter has now been removed from the urgent court roll, with the substantive legal challenge expected to proceed in due course.
