Patience Makwele
The Namibian Presidency has rejected allegations that President Netumbo Nandi-Ndaitwah and her family were involved in a proposed N$612 million solar power project linked to the Chinese-owned Tsumeb smelter.
They insist that the head of state played no role in the negotiation, financing, approval or implementation of the development.
The response follows claims by Independent Patriots for Change (IPC) president Panduleni Itula, who last week questioned the ownership structure and governance arrangements surrounding the proposed 20-megawatt solar power plant, alleging that companies associated with the President’s sons are involved in the venture.
In a statement issued through presidential press secretary Jonas Mbambo, State House maintained that the matters raised by the opposition concern private commercial arrangements and regulatory processes rather than presidential decision-making.
“The President was not involved in the negotiation, the financing, the approval or the implementation of the proposed project. Any suggestion that she was involved is simply not supported by any facts,” Mbambo said.
He added that documents publicly circulated by the opposition do not establish wrongdoing on the part of the President.
“The documents that have been circulated publicly do not establish any transfer of ownership of the reference farm by the President and the First Gentleman, nor do they establish any wrongdoing on the part of the head of state,” Mbambo said.
However, comments made by one of the President’s sons, Tate Nande Ndaitwah, have provided new insight into the structure of the proposed project.
The President’s son, Nande Ndaitwah reportedly confirmed that a memorandum of intent had been signed between Sinomine and Massaus Investment CC, an entity linked to him.
He said the agreement was signed before the registration process of Massaus Investment CC had been completed and stressed that the document was a memorandum of intent rather than a memorandum of understanding.
Nande Ndaitwah further confirmed that Massaus Investment CC is a shareholder in Massaus-Titan Energy Solutions (Pty) Ltd, a company associated with environmental approvals for the project.
The relationship between the two entities was one of the key issues raised by Itula, who questioned why project documents appeared to refer to different legal entities at various stages of the development.
Nande Ndaitwah also rejected suggestions that the solar power plant would be built on Farm B865 Massaus, a property owned by President Nandi-Ndaitwah and First Gentleman Epaphras Ndaitwah.
According to him, the solar facility is planned for the Sinomine smelter area in Tsumeb and not on the farm itself.
He also dismissed concerns that public funds could be used to finance the project, saying funding would be sourced from private equity investors and commercial loans.
The proposed power plant is intended to supply electricity to the Tsumeb smelter, a strategic industrial asset acquired by Chinese mining giant Sinomine Resource Group from Dundee Precious Metals in 2024.
Because of the smelter’s importance to Namibia’s mining sector and the project’s reported value of more than N$600 million, governance experts say public scrutiny is inevitable.
Political analyst and commentator Joubert Harushando said the debate should not be reduced to whether the President’s family is allowed to participate in business.
“The real issue is transparency. Family members of political leaders have the same constitutional rights as every other citizen. The question is whether there are adequate safeguards to ensure the public can have confidence that regulatory decisions were made independently and without influence,” he said.
Harushando argued that public confidence is often shaped as much by perception as by legality.
“Even where no wrongdoing exists, a lack of information creates space for suspicion. Transparency protects institutions, but it also protects the individuals involved.”
Meanwhile, governance and public law researcher Luke Van Vyk said the controversy should serve as an opportunity for both public institutions and private entities to strengthen public confidence through greater disclosure.
“The simplest solution is transparency. If there are documents that explain the relationship between the entities involved, how approvals were obtained and what role each party plays, then making those documents available would go a long way towards addressing public concerns,” Van Vyk said.
He said the issue extends beyond the individuals involved and touches on broader questions about governance and accountability in regulated sectors.
“Many democracies have recognised that conflicts of interest are not only about actual misconduct but also about public perception. Namibia may need to have a broader discussion about whether existing disclosure mechanisms are sufficient when family members of politically exposed persons participate in sectors that depend on state licences, concessions or approvals,” he said.
Van Vyk added that the controversy offers lessons for both government and investors as Namibia seeks to attract large-scale investment into the energy and mining sectors.
“Transparency should not be viewed as a burden. If a project is legitimate and all procedures have been followed, openness generally strengthens confidence rather than undermines it. The issue is no longer whether allegations were made. The issue is whether enough information is available for the public to make an informed judgment.”
“The best way to restore public confidence is to release the relevant documents, explain the process and allow the facts to speak for themselves,” he said.
