Renthia Kaimbi
A payroll officer identified as Otjiwarongo Municipality chief executive officer (CEO) Mberipura Hifitikeko’s “baby mama” allegedly processed payments for a ghost employee for approximately 12 months, but a disciplinary process against her was allegedly halted after the CEO intervened and ordered the case file to be handed to his office for legal advice.
The allegation is among a series of explosive claims contained in a complaint submitted to the Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC) by concerned municipal employees, who are calling for an investigation into alleged corruption, nepotism, procurement irregularities and the misuse of public funds at the local authority.
In the complaint dated 6 May 2026, the employees allege that the payroll officer had been accused of processing payments for a fictitious employee for about a year.
When the alleged irregularity was discovered, the Human Resources Department reportedly initiated disciplinary proceedings, but the process came to a halt after Hifitikeko instructed that the file be transferred to his office to obtain legal advice.
The employees claim that the matter subsequently died, with the payroll officer eventually resigning. It remains unclear whether the municipality recovered the money allegedly paid to the ghost employee.
The complaint further alleges that the municipality paid over N$155 000 to lawyer Jeff Tjitemisa in December 2024 for advice on several long-standing disciplinary cases, including the ghost worker matter.
However, the employees claim that the files were eventually returned to the Human Resources Department without the lawyer’s opinion, raising questions about the purpose and value of the legal services paid for.
The allegations form part of a broader complaint accusing Hifitikeko of allegedly turning the municipality into a network of personal connections since his appointment in August 2024, with employees claiming that recruitment, procurement and legal consultancy processes have been manipulated to benefit his associates.
The employees, who requested anonymity for fear of intimidation and victimisation, describe the situation as a municipal “corruption gravy train” and allege that the CEO has systematically sidelined established administrative structures to consolidate control over appointments and expenditure.
One of the major issues raised is the appointment of Muhindua Kaura, described in the complaint as Hifitikeko’s cousin and personal friend, through his company, Aruak Consultancy Services, to assist with the recruitment of strategic executive positions.
According to the complaint, the council had resolved that an external consultancy should be procured to assist with filling vacant strategic executive positions.
However, the employees allege that Hifitikeko bypassed the procurement process and hand-picked Kaura without declaring his personal interest.
They further claim that Kaura’s company was appointed without submitting mandatory procurement documents and received an advance payment before commencing work.
The employees initially refer to consultancy payments exceeding N$300 000, later putting the amount at more than N$360 000, while another section of the complaint cites approximately N$390 000.
They also allege that the company charged the municipality VAT despite allegedly not being registered for the tax at the time.
The complaint questions whether Kaura, reportedly a full-time executive at state-owned electricity distributor Cenored, obtained leave from his employer to undertake the consultancy work or performed the assignments during working hours.
The employees further allege that Hifitikeko and Kaura were directly involved in shortlisting candidates and selecting interview panels, some of which allegedly comprised their personal associates.
Among the appointments questioned are those of Doreen Zaaruka as head of Human Resources, Marvelous Tjazuko as finance manager and Alma Kakwenda as the CEO’s personal assistant.
The employees allege that the recruitment processes were conducted without the involvement of the municipality’s Human Resources manager, Rachel Engelbrecht.
In Zaaruka’s appointment, the complaint alleges that Aruak Consultancy Services spearheaded the recruitment process, while Hifitikeko participated as a panel member without declaring his personal relationship with the candidate.
The complaint also alleges that the CEO created a procurement supervisor position for his former personal assistant, despite the position allegedly not appearing on the municipality’s organisational structure or wage bill.
It further claims that Utaara Kasete, an employee of Cenored and reportedly Kaura’s sister-in-law, participated in the recruitment process for the CEO’s personal assistant.
The employees claim that recruitment functions were deliberately removed from the Human Resources Department and transferred to the CEO’s office, effectively sidelining the department from its core responsibilities.
They allege that junior officials without relevant qualifications and experience were assigned recruitment responsibilities and reported directly to the CEO.
The complaint also cites an attempted recruitment of 30 contract workers through the CEO’s office, which was allegedly stopped after councillors were alerted to concerns about the fairness of the process.
According to the employees, some intended successful candidates had already been informed to report for duty before councillors intervened and nullified the exercise.
Procurement practices within the municipality’s Technical Department are another major concern.
The employees allege that since Hifitikeko took office, most technical procurements have been conducted through emergency procurement and requests for sealed quotations, methods they claim are susceptible to abuse.
They further allege that the acting head of Technical Services prepares bid documents, solicits quotations from preferred bidders and subsequently participates in the Procurement Committee responsible for adjudicating the bids.
The complaint claims that the Procurement Committee has effectively been reduced to a rubber-stamping body, with members allegedly discussing agenda items with the CEO before formal meetings and subsequently taking note of decisions that had already been made.
The employees argue that this undermines the independence of procurement structures established under the Public Procurement Act of 2015, which provides for procurement management units, bid evaluation committees, procurement committees and accounting officers.
The complaint also questions the appointment of legal consultants, alleging that Hifitikeko repeatedly engaged law firms associated with his friends without following procurement procedures or obtaining competing quotations.
The firms named are Tjitemisa and Associates and Maziza Associates.
According to the employees, legal consultancy fees have run into millions of dollars since the CEO assumed office, with some matters allegedly referred to the firms even after they had already been concluded.
They claim that municipal files were taken to Windhoek for legal advice, but some of the opinions obtained were never implemented or adopted.
The employees are also accusing the municipality’s senior financial management of failing to exercise adequate oversight over the alleged irregular expenditure and procurement practices.
The complaint further implicates councillors, alleging that some members of the seven-person council have been sent on trips originally intended for administrative officials, allowing them to benefit from subsistence and travel allowances.
It alleges that the CEO exploits the financial vulnerability of unemployed councillors, who reportedly rely on relatively small council sitting allowances, to secure their support for decisions.
The employees claim that some councillors have remained silent about alleged wrongdoing in exchange for the travel benefits.
They also question the role of the head of Finance, whom they describe as both the municipality’s financial adviser and head of procurement, in approving expenditure linked to the consultancy appointments.
The employees want the ACC to investigate the alleged ghost worker payments, recruitment of senior officials, appointment and payments made to Aruak Consultancy Services, legal consultancy fees and the alleged use of municipal trips and allowances to influence councillors.
They said they deliberately submitted the complaint to the ACC head office because they were sceptical about how the matter would be handled by the commission’s local office.
The complaint alleges, although acknowledging that the claims are unverified, that Hifitikeko had been boasting about having friends within the local ACC office who would alert him to complaints against him.
The employees said they feared intimidation and retribution and requested that their identities remain confidential.
They maintain that the allegations can be substantiated through internal municipal records and paper trails.
The allegations have not been independently verified, and the complaint does not establish that any of the named individuals committed an offence.
When contacted for comment, Kaura declined to comment because he was traveling.
Hifitikeko could not be reached for comment at the time of publication.
The Windhoek Observer could also not establish whether the ACC initiated the investigation into the allegations.
