Sostenus Wilherm
Affirmative Repositioning (AR) parliamentary leader Job Amupanda has approached the High Court of Namibia in an urgent bid to stop the National Assembly from proceeding with the approval of nominees for the Electoral Commission of Namibia (ECN).
He argued that lawmakers are being asked to decide without access to key selection documents.
The urgent application, filed on Thursday, seeks to interdict the Speaker of the National Assembly, the Secretary of the National Assembly and other relevant parties from proceeding with the vote, debate or resolution on the appointment of the ECN chairperson and commissioners until the requested records have been disclosed and Members of Parliament have been given sufficient time to study them.
Amupanda’s court action follows a failed attempt by the National Assembly on Wednesday to approve the nominations of Gerson Sindano as ECN chairperson, and Emmerentia Leonard and Julieta Diva Ferreira as commissioners after the House failed to reach the required quorum.
Amupanda argues that the refusal by parliamentary authorities to provide records of the selection process prevents him and other lawmakers from exercising their constitutional oversight responsibilities.
He is demanding access to the selection committee’s interview minutes, candidate scoresheets, the committee’s recommendation to the President, and the President’s written nomination submitted to Parliament.
“Without such records, it is impossible for members to apply their minds properly, evaluate compliance with statutory and constitutional requirements, or discharge their duties in the public interest,” Amupanda states.
The AR leader maintains that Members of Parliament must be able to make an informed decision when considering appointments to a constitutional institution such as the ECN.
The application follows correspondence between Amupanda and the National Assembly leadership in which he requested access to the documents.
The Secretary of the National Assembly previously declined the request, arguing that although the Secretary acts as secretary to the selection committee, she is not a member of the committee and therefore does not have authority to release the requested records.
However, Amupanda disputes this interpretation, arguing that the Secretary’s role includes keeping and facilitating access to official records.
The Speaker of the National Assembly, Saara Kuugongelwa-Amadhila, later ruled that the selection committee’s internal records, including interview assessments, scoring sheets and evaluation documents, were not documents of the National Assembly and could not be released by the Speaker or Secretary.
According to the Speaker’s ruling, Parliament’s responsibility is limited to considering whether to approve or reject the President Netumbo Nandi-Ndaitwah’s nominees, rather than reviewing the internal processes of the selection committee.
Amupanda has challenged this position, arguing that it undermines Parliament’s constitutional oversight role.
“The National Assembly cannot protect and defend the Constitution while its leadership forces its members to vote blindly on rumour and hidden records,” he states.
The dispute intensified after Amupanda’s lawyers issued a letter of demand on 8 July requesting the postponement of the vote until the requested documents were provided.
Following the demand, the Office of the Attorney-General provided Parliament’s response and handed over the President’s nomination letters.
However, Amupanda argues that the disclosure was incomplete and only provided after pressure from his legal team.
The documents show that Nandi-Ndaitwah nominated Sindano as ECN chairperson and Leonard and Ferreira as commissioners, subject to approval by the National Assembly.
Meanwhile, the Independence Patriots for Change (IPC) has also raised objections to the ECN appointment process, arguing that the procedure followed by the President does not comply with constitutional requirements.
In a statement issued on Thursday, IPC leader Panduleni Itula said the party had reviewed the President’s letters submitted to the Speaker and concluded that the process was legally defective.
Itula argued that the President’s letters only nominated individuals for approval, rather than formally appointing them before seeking parliamentary approval.
“The Constitution says ‘appointed’. The President’s letters say ‘nominate… for approval… for appointment’. These are not the same words. They are not the same legal act. They are not the same constitutional process,” Itula said.
The IPC also raised concerns over the proposed tenure of Sindano, arguing that his nomination letter does not clearly state the period of his appointment.
The party further questioned whether all required information about the nominees had been made available to Parliament, saying lawmakers and the public should be able to scrutinise the process before appointments are approved.
Itula said IPC would object in the National Assembly to any vote on the matter and would seek urgent relief from the High Court if Parliament proceeds despite the objections.
“We are not questioning the personal qualifications of the nominees. We are questioning the process. And the process is not ours to question, it is the Constitution’s to require,” he said.
Amupanda has also raised concerns over Sindano’s proposed tenure, arguing that the nomination provides for a shorter period compared to the standard term applicable to commissioners.
He argues that withholding the selection records prevents Parliament from properly scrutinising the process.
“The refusal by the administrative officers of the National Assembly to provide a Member of Parliament with the foundational records of a major statutory appointment, coupled with an arbitrary ruling to eliminate constitutional scrutiny from the floor, is a direct assault on the separation of powers,” Amupanda states.
The court application seeks an order compelling the relevant respondents to release the requested documents and declaring the refusal to provide the records unlawful and unconstitutional.
The National Assembly had scheduled to continue debate on the ECN appointments on Thursday after Wednesday’s vote failed due to a lack of quorum.
During Wednesday’s sitting, the Speaker recorded that opposition members had withdrawn from the chamber during the division, resulting in the absence of the required 49 voting members.
