Events in Namibia’s parliament this week should concern every citizen who values democracy.
Parliament is meant to be a place where the voices of the people are represented, debated and translated into laws and policies.
It should not become a place where political tensions, personal confrontations and procedural disputes overshadow the genuine concerns of ordinary Namibians. Disagreements in parliament are not a sign of failure. In fact, disagreement is the essence of democracy.
Members of parliament (MPs) come from different political parties because Namibians themselves hold different views on how the country should be governed.
The problem starts when disagreements degenerate into chaos and prevents parliament from fulfilling its constitutional responsibilities.
A democratic parliament must find a balance between allowing freedom of expression and maintaining the order needed for meaningful debate.
Key to this is the guardian of parliamentary proceedings, the speaker, who must ensure that the institution functions fairly, effectively and with dignity.
This requires firmness, wisdom, patience and, importantly, impartiality.
While maintaining order does not mean silencing MPs. They must have the freedom to question government decisions, criticise policies, and raise concerns on behalf of the people who elected them.
For their part, MPs must recognise that freedom of expression does not give them the right to deliberately disrupt parliamentary proceedings.
DEBATE VS DISRUPTION
There is a difference between robust debate and deliberate disruption. Members have a right to express themselves strongly but responsibly.
Parliament cannot effectively represent the people if every disagreement results in shouting, insults, repeated interruptions and the suspension of proceedings.
However, discipline in parliament must never be selective.
All rules must be applied even-handedly. When an MP raises a legitimate point of order it should not be dismissed simply because it comes from an inconvenient political voice.
The speaker should provide a clear ruling. Explaining decisions can help MPs and the public understand that rulings are based on procedure not political preference.
Wednesday’s events should therefore offer an opportunity for serious reflection. Parliament must ask itself whether its rules and procedures are being used to promote democratic debate or are becoming instruments by which political parties try to defeat each other.
Rules are necessary but rules must serve democracy not suffocate it.
There is also a danger if the majority starts to believe that having the numbers gives it the right to dominate every aspect of parliament.
The opposition also represents Namibians whose concerns deserve to be heard in parliament.
A strong opposition should not be viewed as an enemy of democracy. On the contrary, an effective opposition strengthens democracy by scrutinising proposed laws and demanding accountability.
Numbers alone don’t automatically make every decision correct.
PEOPLE FIRST
Parliament must move away from the dangerous culture in which every issue is automatically divided between the ruling party and the opposition.
The question should not always be “which party benefits from this decision?”
The more important question should be, “Does this decision benefit the people of Namibia?”
MPs are sent to parliament to represent the people.
A hungry citizen does not benefit from political shouting. An unemployed graduate does not benefit from parliamentary insults.
A struggling family does not benefit when MPs fight over issues that could be resolved through fair procedures and mature leadership.
Parliament needs to focus more on issues that affect ordinary citizens.
Namibia faces serious challenges, including unemployment, inequality, poverty, access to quality education, housing, land and economic opportunities. These issues should dominate parliamentary debates.
Political parties may disagree on the solutions but disagreement should produce better ideas rather than chaos.
‘LET’S TALK’
The speaker has an important role to play in restoring public confidence. The speaker must be firm when rules are violated, but equally firm in protecting MPs’ right to speak.
Disorder should not be allowed but nor should order become an excuse for suppressing dissent.
The speaker’s authority is effective when MPs and the public believe that decisions are made fairly.
Parliamentary rules should also be reviewed where necessary. If the same procedural disputes continue to cause confusion and interruptions, parliament must consider whether some rules require greater clarity.
No parliamentary system can function properly if its rules are understood differently by different parties or if MPs believe that procedures are being interpreted selectively.
Parliament should not only be a conversation among politicians.
Citizens, civil society organisations, academics, professionals, workers, young people and communities affected by proposed laws must have meaningful opportunities to contribute.
Parliament’s ultimate purpose is to serve the republic and its people. Every single MP must embrace this responsibility. Parliament belongs to the people of Namibia.
This week’s events should remind us that democracy requires more than elections.
It requires trusted institutions, fair leaders, rules that are applied fairly, and representatives who understand that political power is a responsibility not a weapon.
The strength of Namibia’s parliament will not be measured by how often its members agree, it will be measured by how it handles disagreements.
– Sakaria Johannes is a political science graduate.
