Kae Matundu-Tjiparuro
The Namibian government and its former colonial master, Germany, which continues to pull all the strings, especially when it comes to the issue of restorative justice for the Ovaherero and Nama for the genocide committed by imperial Germany, can try everything and anything in their political and diplomatic book, but there’s no stopping the tide towards true restorative justice.
With Amnesty International bidding to join the case in the Windhoek High Court, to throw its weight behind the Ovaherero and Nama descendants in their effort to stop the dreaded Joint Declaration (JD), there’s no mistaking that the matter is gaining momentum.
But only the Namibian and German governments, and the communities of descendants they have been continuing to fool, if not entice with whatever goodies they have been offering, are continuing to swim against the swelling opposite tide of descendants’ communities against the JD.
Despite being well aware that descendants’ communities have, since day one — that is, back in May 2021, when the Joint Declaration (JD) was revealed in Namibia — rejected it, both the Namibian and German governments have been pushing for its finalisation and implementation, determined to have it implemented before the end of this year.
How this is possible in the face of the groundswell of rejection and opposition to it defies logic.
Nevertheless, the two governments have been working full steam behind closed doors on structures for the implementation of the JD, including what is referred to as the Special Vehicle, through which it seems the money from Germany, which is meant to hoodwink the descendants’ communities and a few descendants, at least those who believe these are reparations, and more shall be flowing sooner than later.
But this is not the only thing that both governments have been working feverishly behind closed doors on.
They seem also to have been out in full force to convince descendants, their communities and their leaders, some traditional leaders, that this is for the good of their communities in terms of development.
It must be made clear that the development of descendants’ communities, like the communities of Ovaherero, Ovambanderu and Nama, with great reservation as there has been no evidence of Nama descendants being among the descendants repatriated from Botswana last year, who are today languishing in the wilderness of the Otjozondjupa Region, much in the same way as their fellow descendants repatriated in earlier years and dumped in the Gam communal areas in the Tsumkwe Constituency of the same region.
These and many Namibians are as much a responsibility of the Namibian government in terms of development. Thus, they themselves, nor their leaders, including traditional leaders, cannot be held at ransom over their development, especially when enticed with money from Germany.
If money from Germany is for Namibian development, channelled through Namibian-German bilateral cooperation, it cannot and must not be presented as reparations. It is simple, and period: development aid from Germany, from which each and every Namibian must and should benefit.
There’s no denying that the repatriates are bona fide descendants of the survivors of genocide. But the claim for reparations and Namibian-German bilateral cooperation cannot and should not be confused with reparations.
The Namibian government must also not forget that, separately from the demand for reparations, in terms of transitional justice, it is obligated towards the integration and development of the repatriates, separate and independent from their claim to and for beneficiation from reparations.
Thus, traditional leaders claiming to do whatever they are doing and intend to do to join the JD circus are doing so for their own lack of principles, but not to have the government help the repatriates. The government’s help and obligation to the repatriates is, and cannot be, tied to the JD.
The applicants in the case in the Windhoek High Court are arguing that the JD is inconsistent with the Constitution, goes against the 2006 Motion on the Ovaherero and Nama Genocide, and against the Namibian people and international law.
In particular, they are seeking the court to pronounce itself on whether the provisions of the JD violate the rights of the Ovaherero and Nama to full and effective reparations.
Needless to say, it is in the interest of Amnesty International, as an international human rights organisation, not only for the court to pronounce itself on such matters, but for Amnesty to do so favourably and positively.
Thus, for the descendants of the survivors of the Ovaherero and Nama genocide, more so than for Amnesty International, this case cannot but be of equal, if not more, interest. An interest that goes beyond mere interest but active participation, including expressing full support for it.
It is thus incumbent on each and every descendant to take keen interest in it, follow it and render support in whatever way he or she can and wherever he or she is, whether in Namibia, Botswana and South Africa, including descendants in the diaspora.
Descendants’ organisations like the Okandjoze Chiefs’ Assembly on Genocide (OGAC), the Genocide Reparations Advocacy Forum (GRAF), and others, for what they are worth, must definitely come to the party in this instance!
Kae Matundu-Tjiparuro is a descendant of the survivors of the Ovaherero, Ovambanderu and Nama genocide, a veteran and freelance journalist, reparations advocate, and adherent of restorative justice.
