Hertta-Maria Amutenja
A sergeant in the Namibian Police Force has been reinstated after winning his dismissal case against the Ministry of Home Affairs, Immigration, Safety and Security.
Nico Poniso Mulonda was discharged from the force in December 2022 following allegations of misconduct.
The Windhoek High Court confirmed a settlement agreement on 16 July between MHAISS minister Albert Kawana and the ministry, which agreed to reinstate Mulonda.
“The Respondent shall reinstate the Applicant in his position as Sergeant (02) within 30 days from the date this settlement agreement is made an order of court. The Respondent shall pay to the Applicant his full back pay from the date of dismissal to the date of reinstatement, together with full employment benefits occasioned thereto,” reads the agreement.
The Ministry was also ordered to cover 50% of Mulonda’s legal costs.
According to court documents in June 2021, Mulonda was reported to have forcibly demanded cell phones from the public at a nightclub in Rundu and cocking his duty firearm for no apparent reason while off duty.
The complainants retrieved their phones and chose not to press charges.
Despite witnesses not pressing charges, the investigation confirmed Mulonda’s actions were against police regulations, leading to a board of inquiry.
The board recommended a demotion, but Inspector-General Joseph Shikongo found this insufficient given the seriousness of the offence, its impact on public trust, and the integrity of the police force.
Mulonda, with the assistance of his legal representative, Rundu-based lawyer Bernhard Tjatjara of Bernhard Tjatjara and Co. Inc., filed an application to review and set aside the ministry’s decision to dismiss him from the force on August 9, 2023.
In the review application filed at the High Court, Mulonda cited grounds of review, which included that no eyewitnesses were called to the hearing that led to his dismissal and that the case against him was based on a web of hearsay evidence.
As stated in the review application, such hearsay evidence was dangerous and inadmissible.
The government attorney’s office cited the ministry as a respondent, and they agreed that Mulonda’s disciplinary inquiry procedure was flawed.
This resulted in the parties concluding and entering into a settlement agreement.
