Andrew Kathindi
Fisheries minister, Albert Kawana maintains he still supports the actual amendments made to the country’s Marine Resources Act of 2000 that was perverted by those accused in the Fishrot scandal. He qualifies his support by saying the problem was that the controversial legal changes were eventually used for corrupt practices.
This comes as Former Fisheries Minister, Bernard Esau in cahoots with former Justice minister Sackey Shanghala, quickly pushed to have the Marine Resources Act amended in 2015, giving Esau powers to allocate fishing quotas to Fishcor, which in turn ended up in the hands of Icelandic fishing company, Samherji in return for kickbacks.
Kawana pointed to section 3 of the amendment of Act 27 which states that the State owns and exercises sovereign rights over marine resources within the exclusive economic zone, territorial waters and the continental shelf in accordance with Article 100 of the Namibian Constitution and the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea of 10 December 1982.
“What is wrong with that? The amendments themselves are correct and should be supported,” Kawana told Windhoek Observer.
“The amendment is to ensure that the resource must be owned by the state in terms of Article 100 of the Supreme law of the land. So, for me how can I not support such kind of amendment?”
He further argued his narrow point of view by saying, “Does it mean that the constitution guarantees corruption under Article 100 where that constitution says those resources belong to the state? Why shouldn’t I support such kind of move? The resources must be controlled by the state.”
The Minister’s statements appear to be a U-turn from statements he made earlier this year to a local daily paper. In January this year, the Minister is reported to have confirmed that government will be reversing the amendments that were enacted in 2015 to empower Esau to allocate quotas.
The Minister is also quoted to have said that other recommendations in terms improving the Act would also be implemented.
However, the Minister appears to have changed his tune as he noted, “Laws sometimes are very innocent. It depends how you apply that law. To the best of my knowledge, that 2015 amendment, that law is accordance with the provision of the constitution.”
This comes as, during a bail hearing for Esau and his co-accused and, son-in-law Tamson Hatuikulipi, lawyer Richard Metcalfe argued that if Esau was part of an illegal scheme, then so should Kawana, then Attorney General at the time and then Justice Minister Pendukeni Iivula-Itana, along with others as they were copied in a correspondence between Esau and Shanghala in 2012 over the regulation of the fishing industry.
“If you’re copied, you’re copied. That’s it. Copied means you just take note. And when it comes to cabinet, it goes to parliament which passes the law. It has nothing to do with corruption. Do you mean to tell me that all members of parliament, both national assembly and National Council are guilty of corruption? That argument is very flawed,” Kawana said.
Meanwhile, Iivula-Itana said that she would need to see the document she was copied in as it was years ago, however, she said, it says nothing if she was merely copied.
“The principle of copying somebody into a document is to be informed, but for that person to take action. You are not directly involved, but you are informed that something is happening,” she said.
Esau was arrested last year on corruption allegations along with several others, among them, former Minister Sacky Shanghala who initiated the process of amending the Act.
