Renthia Kaimbi and Sostenus Wilherm
Independent Patriots for Change leader Dr Panduleni Itula, has challenged the issuance of an Environmental Clearance Certificate (ECC) to Namibia Marine Phosphate (Pty) Ltd for the Sandpiper Marine Phosphate Project through a notice of appeal and legal objection filed with the minister of environment, forestry and tourism.
The appeal, lodged on 10 August 2026 by Itula on behalf of the official opposition, contends that the environmental commissioner, Timotheus Mufeti erred in approving the project under Mining Licence 170, arguing that the decision violates foundational principles of Namibia’s environmental law and constitutional guarantees of administrative justice.
The notice of appeal, brought under Section 50 of the Environmental Management Act (Act No. 7 of 2007), advances four grounds for challenging the validity of the ECC granted on 5 August 2026.
The first ground of objection asserts that the decision contravenes Section 3(2)(c) of the Environmental Management Act, which mandates that “a precautionary approach must be applied when an activity may cause significant damage to the environment.”
Itula argues that marine seabed bulk dredging is entirely unprecedented globally, with no commercial marine phosphate extraction operations existing anywhere from which long-term empirical evidence can be drawn.
The appeal warns that proceeding in the highly volatile Benguela Upwelling Zone without scientific certainty creates an impermissible risk of irreversible ecological collapse, violating what he describes as the foundational principle of Namibian environmental law.
The second ground of objection cites Section 3(2)(a) of the Act, which requires that public consultation and the choice of resource use must serve the public interest.
The appeal highlights that Namibia’s fishing industry directly and indirectly supports approximately 298 000 Namibians and contributes billions to the national GDP.
By contrast, Namibia Marine Phosphate’s proposed operations project minimal domestic employment benefits while introducing systemic threats to commercial fish stocks.
Itula contends that heavy seabed dredging triggers toxic sediment resuspension, severe water-column deoxygenation, and destroys irreplaceable benthic fish-breeding grounds.
The appeal further argues that the state cannot legally prioritize an unproven, high-risk mining project over a renewable resource that ensures food security.
The third ground raises concerns about the objectivity of the environmental assessments, noting that the 28 specialist studies remain primarily funded and driven by the project proponent.
Itula argues that Mufeti erred in approving the certificate without commissioning an entirely independent, state-led Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) regarding cumulative marine mining impacts.
The appeal contends that relying on developer-sponsored studies breaches the requirement of administrative justice guaranteed under Article 18 of the Namibian Constitution.
The fourth ground of objection cites Section 3(2)(b) of the Act, which dictates that environmental management must ensure that the needs of present and future generations are met.
The appeal argues that the chemical and physical alteration of the marine shelf cannot be mitigated or reversed, permanently compromising the ocean’s bio-capacity for future generations to profit a single private venture.
Itula told the Windhoek Observer yesterday that President Netumbo Nandi-Ndaitwah can only withdraw the ECC on the basis of his appeal, and not on any objection, arguing that Nandi-Ndaitwah has no legal authority to act in the matter by virtue of the Assignment of Powers Act.
He maintained that the appeal lodged by the IPC provides sufficient grounds for line minister, Indileni Daniel to set aside and nullify the ECC, and that if the President truly opposes the phosphate project, his appeal alone should be reason enough to instruct the minister to act accordingly.
The Confederation of Namibian Fishing Associations (CNFA) has separately placed Mufeti on notice of an immediate legal challenge over procedural irregularities.
The CNFA has challenged the Environmental Commissioner’s decision to grant the ECC to Namibia Marine Phosphate, arguing that he breached a legitimate expectation created when he acknowledged their information requests in 2022 and promised to respond.
The association had sought information on the environmental assessment process through multiple letters between May and July 2022, but received no response until the Commissioner acknowledged receipt on 29 July 2022 and indicated his office was “in process to respond.”
The CNFA argues this created a legitimate expectation that he would not proceed with a decision without first responding, citing the High Court’s 2019 Ngavetene judgment which established that public authorities must honour promises to follow particular procedures.
The association was surprised on 7 August 2026 to learn the ECC had been granted despite its opposition.
The CNFA has demanded that Mufeti explain his actions by close of business on 10 August 2026 (Monday) and has put him on notice that the validity of the decision will be challenged immediately.
The association has previously been recognised by the High Court as a party with sufficient interest in the proposed mining activities and has consistently raised substantive concerns about the environmental assessment, including whether it covers both marine and terrestrial components, whether independent scientists with adequate expertise would be consulted, and the potential impacts of seabed removal and slurry reintroduction on marine resources and breeding grounds.
The appeal filed by Itula requests that Daniel sustain the appeal, nullify the ECC, and declare a moratorium on all offshore marine phosphate mining applications until an independent, state-managed macro-impact assessment is executed.
The combined challenges mean the environmental commissioner must now defend not only the environmental basis of his decision but also the fairness and transparency of the process followed before the certificate was granted.
