Niël Terblanché
The fallout from Namibia’s 2024 Presidential and National Assembly elections continues to deepen, with legal battles underway to contest or defend the integrity of the process.
At the centre of the controversy are challenges led by the Independent Patriots for Change (IPC) and the Landless People’s Movement (LPM).
LPM President Bernadus Swartbooi has filed a notice of motion to the Electoral Court in which he requests to join the IPC’s leader, Panduleni Itula’s legal challenge to the election results.
Swartbooi is alleging that the Electoral Commission of Namibia (ECN) and President Nangolo Mbumba acted unlawfully in extending the voting period.
Mbumba extended the voting period to 29 and 30 November from the initial 27 November.
Swartbooi’s affidavit lambasts the extension as an “egregious abuse of power.”
“The conduct of the ECN and the President disenfranchised the electorate and robbed them of their constitutionally guaranteed right to vote,” Swartbooi declared.
He criticised the selective extension of voting in pro-SWAPO regions, describing it as a breach of equality before the law and a manoeuvre to secure a favourable outcome for the ruling party.
Swartbooi contends that the extension, facilitated through Proclamation No. 34 of 2024, was issued post facto and lacked the legal authority required under Namibia’s Constitution and Electoral Act.
Swartbooi called for the court to invalidate the election, suggesting either the exclusion of votes cast during the extended period or a fresh election conducted lawfully.
“Namibia does not need a government whose legitimacy is in question; it needs a lawfully elected government that represents the will of the people,” he argued.
The IPC, which filed its application on 23 December 2024, seeks to overturn the election results, citing irregularities and constitutional violations.
The party argues that Mbumba overstepped his constitutional powers by extending the voting period and introducing new polling stations, actions they assert are exclusive prerogatives of the ECN.
The IPC’s secretary general, Christine !Auchamus detailed alleged discrepancies in her affidavit, including unauthorised voting, malfunctioning verification devices, and procedural lapses at polling stations.
“The principles of free and fair elections were fundamentally undermined,” she stated while calling for the results to be annulled and a fresh poll ordered.
The case is scheduled for a hearing on 15 January 2025, with the IPC demanding the President and ECN cover legal costs incurred during the proceedings.
In response, SWAPO who is the 5th respondent in the matter has dismissed the IPC’s application as “procedurally and substantively defective.”
In affidavits submitted by President Nangolo Mbumba and Swapo’s secretary general, Sophia Shaningwa, the party argues that the IPC’s case is riddled with critical legal and factual deficiencies.
Shaningwa in her affidavit states that the IPC failed to comply with Section 169 of the Electoral Act, which requires security for costs when filing an election challenge.
“This oversight renders the IPC’s application invalid,” Shaningwa asserted.
She also criticised the IPC for not joining key officials, such as returning officers, whose actions are directly implicated in the case.
Shaningwa argued that the extension of voting hours, authorised by presidential proclamation, was a necessary measure to ensure no eligible voters were disenfranchised due to logistical issues on the original polling day.
Furthermore, Shaningwa questioned the credibility of IPC’s evidence, accusing !Auchamus of providing false statements in her affidavit.
“This serious misrepresentation undermines the credibility of the IPC’s case and must invite the court’s censure,” she stated.
Shaningwa warned of broader ramifications if the elections were annulled, highlighting potential instability for elected public servants who were deemed to have resigned upon the announcement of results.
“If the election is annulled, it could leave these individuals in precarious positions,” she cautioned.
SWAPO has requested the court to dismiss the IPC’s application with costs, including punitive costs on an attorney-and-own-client scale.
The ruling party maintains that the elections were conducted in substantial compliance with the law, arguing that any alleged irregularities were insufficient to alter the outcome.
