Political Perspective: Swapo Faces Acid Test

By: GWEN LISTER

ALL eyes are on the Swapo Central Committee meeting this weekend.

Will President Sam Nujoma prevail or will one or other braveheart

decide enough is enough and oppose a fourth term? Or will they

postpone a difficult decision until later in the month prior to

Congress? The situation seems fairly fluid at this time - things

could go either way - but in my view the ball is squarely in the

court of the top Swapo leadership and whether they are able to

withstand the power of the President or allow his will to prevail

yet again.

DIFFICULT indeed for the leadership to break with a past that

allowed President Nujoma to rule the roost.

 

Some critics may point a finger at the incumbent for being

dictatorial, but one has to point out that this is only because

those at the top have allowed him his way in just about all

things.

 

Can they therefore now stand their ground and oppose a fourth

term, even if it is done (ostensibly) by testing the will of the

people via a referendum? Ask just about any Swapo leader privately,

and they would probably say they do not believe that a fourth term

for President Nujoma is a good idea.

 

Publicly, of course, and for obvious reasons, their stance might

be somewhat different.

 

But then, they really have only themselves to blame because they

haven't helped instil a more democratic leadership pattern in the

ruling party over the decades.

 

As someone who has fairly consistently expressed the belief that

President Nujoma would have the good sense to stand down in the

interests of democracy, this country and the people, I now have to

review my opinion.

 

The question is whether all along, he simply adopted the

pretence that he would vacate office at the end of his third

term.

 

After all, he did say on a number of occasions he would not be

available for another stint as Head of State.

 

Or has his mind been changed by flattery and design? Those who,

for reasons best known to themselves, are orchestrating

demonstrations of public support for the incumbent to stay on? It

is fairly obvious that the sudden moves to call for a referendum to

decide on whether President Nujoma should continue at the helm, are

not spontaneous calls by the Namibian nation.

 

The referendum issue has been a hot topic for some time now, and

it has been whispered that this would be route to take in order to

justify what is clearly a wrong decision.

 

Our founding fathers (and mothers) should remind themselves

that, when they drafted the Constitution, one of the major concerns

was the presidents-for-life situation that has characterised so

much of the African continent.

 

It is this that has largely kept democracy as well as

development in abeyance for the peoples and countries in

question.

 

This was a primary reason for the two-term presidential

limit.

 

And we've already changed it once.

 

And now, because of the inadvisability of doing so again - at

least not without a show of public support for such a move - the

idea of a referendum has been floated to get around this

problem.

 

It is clearly designed by some in the top ranks of the Party,

and, although it may appear to be a grassroots initiative, it is

most certainly not.

 

The President could have stopped it.

 

Could have said, referendum or not, that it was time to go.

 

But he hasn't because he's clearly open to this option.

 

So, if he won't put his foot down, then maybe it is time that

the Swapo leadership do so instead.

 

It doesn't need to be done in an ugly or confrontational

manner.

 

Of course, they would emphasise that it's been a job well done,

that his contribution to Namibia's history cannot be challenged or

removed - but now's the time for him to leave in a statesmanlike

manner that most would approve.

 

I know that, given the choice, a majority of the Namibian people

- even the so-called white business community and a good deal of

the international community as well - may feel stability is the key

and this can only be ensured by Nujoma himself, but that doesn't

alter the fact that it would be wrong to bend the rules again.

 

The Swapo hierarchy can halt the march towards a fourth term if

they put principle before expediency and the bad habits of a

lifetime.

 

The point is whether they're up to the challenge of history.

 

DIFFICULT indeed for the leadership to break with a past that

allowed President Nujoma to rule the roost.Some critics may point a

finger at the incumbent for being dictatorial, but one has to point

out that this is only because those at the top have allowed him his

way in just about all things.Can they therefore now stand their

ground and oppose a fourth term, even if it is done (ostensibly) by

testing the will of the people via a referendum? Ask just about any

Swapo leader privately, and they would probably say they do not

believe that a fourth term for President Nujoma is a good

idea.Publicly, of course, and for obvious reasons, their stance

might be somewhat different.But then, they really have only

themselves to blame because they haven't helped instil a more

democratic leadership pattern in the ruling party over the

decades.As someone who has fairly consistently expressed the belief

that President Nujoma would have the good sense to stand down in

the interests of democracy, this country and the people, I now have

to review my opinion.The question is whether all along, he simply

adopted the pretence that he would vacate office at the end of his

third term.After all, he did say on a number of occasions he would

not be available for another stint as Head of State.Or has his mind

been changed by flattery and design? Those who, for reasons best

known to themselves, are orchestrating demonstrations of public

support for the incumbent to stay on? It is fairly obvious that the

sudden moves to call for a referendum to decide on whether

President Nujoma should continue at the helm, are not spontaneous

calls by the Namibian nation.The referendum issue has been a hot

topic for some time now, and it has been whispered that this would

be route to take in order to justify what is clearly a wrong

decision.Our founding fathers (and mothers) should remind

themselves that, when they drafted the Constitution, one of the

major concerns was the presidents-for-life situation that has

characterised so much of the African continent.It is this that has

largely kept democracy as well as development in abeyance for the

peoples and countries in question.This was a primary reason for the

two-term presidential limit.And we've already changed it once.And

now, because of the inadvisability of doing so again - at least not

without a show of public support for such a move - the idea of a

referendum has been floated to get around this problem.It is

clearly designed by some in the top ranks of the Party, and,

although it may appear to be a grassroots initiative, it is most

certainly not.The President could have stopped it.Could have said,

referendum or not, that it was time to go.But he hasn't because

he's clearly open to this option.So, if he won't put his foot down,

then maybe it is time that the Swapo leadership do so instead.It

doesn't need to be done in an ugly or confrontational manner.Of

course, they would emphasise that it's been a job well done, that

his contribution to Namibia's history cannot be challenged or

removed - but now's the time for him to leave in a statesmanlike

manner that most would approve.I know that, given the choice, a

majority of the Namibian people - even the so-called white business

community and a good deal of the international community as well -

may feel stability is the key and this can only be ensured by

Nujoma himself, but that doesn't alter the fact that it would be

wrong to bend the rules again.The Swapo hierarchy can halt the

march towards a fourth term if they put principle before expediency

and the bad habits of a lifetime.The point is whether they're up to

the challenge of history.

---