I have followed with keen interest the proposed acquisition and merger of Schwenk Namibia by Whale Rock Cement.
The Namibia Competition Commission’s (NaCC) first public stakeholder engagement on the proposed acquisition of shares in Schwenck Namibia Pty Limited by West China Cement (WCC) was held at the Commission’s chambers in Windhoek on 9 July 2020.
A second stakeholders’ conference was held in Windhoek on 5 June 2025.
I attended, participated actively, and on each occasion stated my objections to the proposed acquisition and merger clearly and without equivocation.
On both occasions, the NaCC, drawing on stakeholder input and its own analysis, objected to the proposed acquisition and merger. It gave sound reasons for doing so.
The Ministry of Mines and Energy plays a pivotal role as custodian of Namibia’s natural resources and must ensure that these resources are explored, developed and utilised responsibly.
It must be done in a way that grows and sustains the Namibian economy for the benefit of its people. This cannot be overstated.
CONSIDERATIONS
NaCC, by contrast, is an independent statutory body established under the Competition Act, 2003, to promote and safeguard competition in the Namibian economy for the benefit of consumers, businesses and the country as a whole.
In fulfilling this mandate, NaCC weighs consumer welfare, legal certainty, competition law, consumer welfare, public interest and market concentration.
Having considered public and stakeholder input, NaCC formally objected to the proposed acquisition and merger of Schwenck Namibia by Whale Rock Cement.
I am confident minister Modestus Amutse was briefed on NaCC’s position, and was informed of public objections.
For context, in the Vitol matter, a different sector (petroleum), NaCC originally prohibited fuel retailer Nasan Energies from procuring fuel from global energy trader Vitol for five years.
It was a strict condition attached to Nasan’s acquisition of 53 Engen and Shell service stations, intended to prevent excessive market concentration given Vitol’s already substantial share of the wholesale market.
In that case, minister Amutse cited unfamiliarity with Vitol’s ties to Namibia, a curious admission from a minister who ought to be fully up on the affairs of such a strategic portfolio.
TERMS OF ENDEARMENT
Despite clear warnings of market concentration (and the risk of monopoly pricing), the minister invoked section 49 of the Competition Act to overturn the prohibition of the merger, attaching conditions of his own.
Those conditions amount to little more than a smokescreen and carry scant weight against NaCC’s original findings.
It remains uncertain whether the promised jobs will materialise, while the acquisition and merger will entrench a dominant market position bordering on monopoly.
What then is left for NaCC to monitor going forward?
The minister is aware of the implications of his decision, and it is difficult to see how this serves the best interests of NaCC or Namibian consumers.
Following the Vitol/Nasan matter, the first instance of the minister overturning NaCC’s prohibition, he also overturned the prohibition of the Ohorongo Cement–Cheetah Cement merger.
Whose interests is the minister serving? Not Namibia’s it seems, and clearly not NaCC’s considered position.
NaCC may speak confidently of the minister’s statutory powers to overturn its decisions, and I note the change in tone on this point compared to its own earlier findings. History, however, will judge these matters in due course.
CONSEQUENCES
It is on record that NaCC twice prohibited the proposed acquisition of Schwenk Namibia by Whale Rock Cement.
What has changed since the appointment of minister Amutse? One is left to wonder whether he alone is fully versed in Section 49 of the Competition Act, and whether his predecessor simply lacked the same command of it.
The minister is aware of the consequences of his actions, and history will judge him and those whose interests are served by Section 49.
Competition must prevail in Namibia’s cement industry and no provision of the Competition Act should be invoked to serve narrow interests at the expense of the Namibian nation.
No one is above the law. Every institution and individual, the president, senior government officials and the judiciary must remain open to scrutiny and accountability in the national interest.
In opposing this merger and acquisition, I maintain that “when the wind changes direction, what was hidden becomes visible”. That said, exercising such discretion does not place the decision beyond criticism or debate.
I continue to believe the commission’s original decision better safeguarded competition, protected local industry, and promoted Namibia’s broader economic interests.
Respectfully, I remain unconvinced that the reversal serves those objectives.
Competition must triumph in Namibia’s cement industry above everything else.
- Jefta Gaoab is a resident of Otavi.
