IT has taken former Prime Minister and now Trade Minister Hage Geingob almost two decades to realise that the unitary State is under threat from tribalism.
In his support to the Special Advisors and Regional Governors Appointment Amendment Bill tabled by Minister Jerry Ekandjo in the National Assembly on Wednesday, Geingob referred to ‘centrifugal forces who want to practice diversity in unity’ instead of ‘moulding these different ethnic groups into one Namibian nation. In other words, unity in diversity’.As subscribers and defenders of the Namibian Constitution we would be among the first to defend the unitary Namibian State. To our knowledge there has only been one serious challenge to undermine the unity of the State and that was the Caprivi secessionist movement, which in August 1999 attempted to dismember Namibia.Geingob’s motivation about tribal agents marauding around threatening the unitary state is farfetched.There must be other reasons. Come on senior, tell us why after 18 years of the promulgation of the act providing for the appointment of regional governors by the regional councils themselves Cabinet suddenly finds a problem.The majority of individuals who have served as governors since the establishment of regional councils came from the ruling party, Swapo. Of late, it is only the Kunene Region that Swapo has been unable to conquer.But despite that we have not heard of difficulties the central Government experienced in getting development there. On the contrary, the region and Khorixas (former regional capital) in particular, have been starved of development projects.Will development to Khorixas and the region only come when the governor is appointed by the President?We suspect that there is more than meets the eye in giving power to the President to appoint governors to represent him and the central Government.The timing of the law is also suspect – a little less than two months before the regional council elections.Is the law in anticipation of better performance of the opposition in the regions, where there could be possible hung (no political party with a majority) regional councils unable to elect a governor? Or is it because the ruling party is afraid that there would be a number of regions where its majority would be threatened and a opposition regional councillor is elected as the governor?There is a bit of truth in regional councillors neglecting their constituencies when they double as governors. But, if they want to, they can actually become more effective for their constituencies, because as governors they are better equipped with official robust all-terrain vehicles, fuel, drivers and support staff, unlike their peers.What we have witnessed over the years is that the majority of the governors spend their time fighting with their regional council officials for administrative control. If they don’t spend their energies on administrative issues, that are the domain of technocrats, they’ll have more time for their constituencies.To us, the appointment of governors by the Head of State to represent the central Government is but a vote of no confidence in the 12 Swapo governors who have represented their constituencies. Strangely enough, the word is that all 12 except one (David Boois from Karas Region) have been promised the new governor jobs, which are said to be at the level of a deputy minister. We do not see the rationale for another appointment of a presidential representative in the regions.Is this not tantamount to duplication? The Minister of Regional and Local Government and Housing, under which the regional councils fall, is appointed by the President and therefore, as the line minister, should be the link between the Head of State and the regional councils.It is our hope the (presidential) governors will not just serve as another glorified representatives of the State and become another liability on the already stretched treasury.To us, the argument of the unitary state under threat does not hold.
