Kae Matundu-Tjiparuro
Each and every one currently seized with the cause of restorative justice regarding what has been widely known and referred to as the genocide of the Ovaherero and Nama, with few exceptions, if any, somehow and somewhere need a mind reset.
Pretenders and non-pretenders alike. Because while all and/or most are claiming to clamour and genuinely be agitating and seeking for restorative justice, it is not clear, even within and among those genuinely seeking restorative justice, what the centrality of such a search is. What restorative justice is, and for what and what it entails and/or may entail?
The Ovaherero, who can and may be credited with the initiation of the reparations movement, as the quest for restorative justice is and has also interchangeably been referred to, the search for restorative justice and/or reparations has from the word go been rooted in the Extermination Order issued by then Commander of Imperial Germany’s armed forces in then South West Africa, the Schutztruppe, General Lothar von Trotha, on 2 October 1904 at Ozombuzovindimba in what is today the Otjinene Constituency – where this year in the Omaheke Region, the second official commemoration of Genocide Remembrance Day (GRD) by the Namibian government was hosted.
Equally, the Nama genocide descendants and their communities are and have been putting emphasis on their near annihilation, similarly as with the Ovaherero, on another extermination order against their forebears on 22 April 1905.
Then follows a cohort of descendants also laying claim to endurance at the hands of the German colonial authorities – which necessarily is not and may not be for their near annihilation due to extermination orders against them as is and was the case with the Ovaherero and Nama. Among this cohort are the San and Damara communities.
The Aandonga, who are cousins of the Ovaherero, are also not without their claim, if the 28 January 1904 Battle of Namutoni when about 500 warriors led by King Nehale lya Mpingana attacked the Imperial Germany’s garrison at Fort Namutoni in northern South West Africa then.
Joining the bandwagon of those claiming restorative justice at its tail end, buoyed by the 2006 National Assembly Resolution, is the government of the Republic of Namibia, whose exact involvement has not been clear.
Based on different readings and/or interpretations of the 2006 Resolution, imploring the Namibian government to cause negotiations with the government of the Federal Republic of Germany – were these negotiations and/or dialogue between the Namibian government and its German counterpart?
Or between the descendants and their communities on the one hand, and the German government on the other, with the Namibian government as go-between?
This has even become not only much debatable but disputable, partly by design, thereby resulting in the restorative justice cause since being reduced and/or relegated to a political if not tribal ball game – between and among the would-be descendants themselves, as it is between and among them as it is between the government on the one hand and the descendants and their communities.
The descendants communities now grouped in many groups, how many it is hard to tell. But the obvious and outstanding divides lately, since 2021, have been those for and against the Joint Declaration (JD), with one stream of descendants and their communities with the government behind it, or vice versa, the government usurping the cause having arrogated itself a would-be claimant in its own right with the descendants and their communities instead now behind it rather than the government being behind them in what is essentially their cause.
Lingering somewhere in these configurations is the government of the Federal Republic of Germany, pretending to only follow the cue of the Namibian government as its co-state actor in this matter, having together with the Namibian government arrogated the cause to a state-state matter.
The German government, lately with the JD, has seemed, more than may be obvious to the naked eye, aligned to the JD, and/or as you wish more the case of the Namibian government and one group of would-be descendants and their communities aligning to the dictates of Germany’s neo-colonial hegemony.
The descendants and their communities who have totally rejected the JD cannot be said to be a monolithic cohesive group either, given some holier-than-thou posturing as the sole and authentic representatives.
Oblivious that there are many descendants and their communities who never steadfastly veered away from the cause, hence the popular declaration and unwavering position of “nothing about us without us.”
This notwithstanding, the various all who have been firmly against the JD are not known to have been sitting around the same table.
As in this configuration, some have not only been posturing as more equal and authentic than fellows but self-righteously determined to be seen to be more equal and sole and authentic.
This has been rendering unity, even in action, hitherto seeming unfeasible as much as it is possible and plausible. This surely cannot be the end to these showmanship, as it is by no means exhaustive and cannot be.
In between there must be a shade of grey, encompassing many shades in itself of many who are undecided, indifferent, disillusioned, disappointed, and dissonant as there may be and can, given those who never ever have been out of the starting blocks as far as agitation for restorative justice is concerned.
Not to mention those who think and may be thinking all these have been a waste of precious resources and that the past is better left to be what it is – the gone-by past.
Mention must also be made in this regard of an equally important interest group in this equation: the German-speaking Namibians.
One is not sure if in this regard the Forum of German-Speaking Namibians is and has been speaking and representing this community, of German-speaking Namibians and/or Namibians of German descent, if at all it can be referred to as a community.
Whose own position on this matter can at best be described as ambivalent and ambiguous if not outright coy. What about international solidarity?
Here and there has been a grain of support, but overall the issue remains a non-issue, let alone on the sub-regional African level up to the continental level. Thus, also on the international level.
Given this state of affairs, it cannot but be illogical for the Namibian government to be contemplating finalising the matter before the end of this year, with the JD, ill-conceived as it is and has been, being far from a credible reparation proposal.
Hence the need for the rest of the minds and serious recalibration. As the wind that has been blowing regarding slavery reparations, encompassing even genocide reparations, promises just the right and proper vehicle even for the cause of the Ovaherero and Nama.
*Kae Matundu-Tjiparuro is a descendant of the survivors of the Ovaherero, Ovambanderu, and Nama genocide, veteran and freelance journalist, reparations advocate, and adherent of restorative justice.
