Gloves off in Katiti case

THE Walvis Bay Town Council has given notice that it will oppose a High Court challenge by the Walvis Bay Ratepayers Association (WBRA) on a N$2,8 million payout to a former Council official.

The Chairman of the WBRA, Jumbo de Villiers, yesterday informed The Namibian that the first of four respondents in the case, namely the Walvis Bay Town Council, had given the notice via its legal representatives, Metcalfe Legal Practitioners. He could not provide any further details, as the documents setting out the Council’s defence still had to be filed with the court.The other three respondents are the Minister of Regional and Local Government, the Erongo Regional Council, and former Walvis Bay CEO Augustinus Katiti.These respondents had not yet indicated whether they intended to oppose the case, and according to De Villiers, the WBRA will have to await advice from its attorneys, Kinghorn Associates, on how to proceed.The Council’s “notice to oppose” was given exactly on deadline – the required time to respond was 15 working days after the notice of motion from the High Court of Namibia was delivered to them on August 8.In the motion to the High Court, the WBRA challenged alleged irregularities surrounding Katiti’s payout after he resigned from the Walvis Bay Municipality at short notice.Katiti handed in his resignation on March 27 this year, giving notice that his last working day would be April 2.The Council Management Committee, on the day Katiti resigned, recommended that Council condone the short notice of resignation, and resolved, as “a legally binding agreement between the parties, a full and final lump sum amount of N$2 781 329,90, gross, be paid to the CEO on March 30 2007”.According to the WBRA, Katiti had served only one year of a five-year contract renewed in 2006.The WBRA claimed that his premature resignation amounted to a breach of contract for which he “appears to have been generously compensated rather than to be held liable for such breach” by Council.According to De Villiers’s statement, as contained in an affidavit, the WBRA was not convinced that Katiti’s resignation package formed part of his conditions of employment.The association also feels that the secrecy surrounding the resignation package left the town’s ratepayers with a clear impression that Council had acted beyond its powers.”The WBRA and its members and other ratepayers and residents placed their trust in the Walvis Bay Town Council not to spend money in unauthorised and unlawful manner.Council can only exercise such powers as are granted to it in terms of the Act.In the circumstances the WBRA must conclude that first respondent acted ultra vires its powers,” the WBRA affidavit stated.Up until now the Walvis Bay Town Council has declined to comment on the matter, or to offer any explanation.He could not provide any further details, as the documents setting out the Council’s defence still had to be filed with the court. The other three respondents are the Minister of Regional and Local Government, the Erongo Regional Council, and former Walvis Bay CEO Augustinus Katiti.These respondents had not yet indicated whether they intended to oppose the case, and according to De Villiers, the WBRA will have to await advice from its attorneys, Kinghorn Associates, on how to proceed.The Council’s “notice to oppose” was given exactly on deadline – the required time to respond was 15 working days after the notice of motion from the High Court of Namibia was delivered to them on August 8.In the motion to the High Court, the WBRA challenged alleged irregularities surrounding Katiti’s payout after he resigned from the Walvis Bay Municipality at short notice.Katiti handed in his resignation on March 27 this year, giving notice that his last working day would be April 2.The Council Management Committee, on the day Katiti resigned, recommended that Council condone the short notice of resignation, and resolved, as “a legally binding agreement between the parties, a full and final lump sum amount of N$2 781 329,90, gross, be paid to the CEO on March 30 2007”.According to the WBRA, Katiti had served only one year of a five-year contract renewed in 2006. The WBRA claimed that his premature resignation amounted to a breach of contract for which he “appears to have been generously compensated rather than to be held liable for such breach” by Council. According to De Villiers’s statement, as contained in an affidavit, the WBRA was not convinced that Katiti’s resignation package formed part of his conditions of employment.The association also feels that the secrecy surrounding the resignation package left the town’s ratepayers with a clear impression that Council had acted beyond its powers.”The WBRA and its members and other ratepayers and residents placed their trust in the Walvis Bay Town Council not to spend money in unauthorised and unlawful manner.Council can only exercise such powers as are granted to it in terms of the Act.In the circumstances the WBRA must conclude that first respondent acted ultra vires its powers,” the WBRA affidavit stated.Up until now the Walvis Bay Town Council has declined to comment on the matter, or to offer any explanation.