The United Democratic Front (UDF) has defended its vote supporting Gerson Sindano’s nomination as electoral commission chairperson despite intense backlash and boycott from fellow opposition parties.
The controversy follows a divided National Assembly vote in which several opposition parties walked out in protest against Sindano’s nomination to head the Electoral Commission of Namibia, while the UDF remained in the chamber and voted in favour of his approval.
Sindano secured 49 votes and now awaits being appointed by president Netumbo Nandi-Ndaitwah.
UDF vice president Nico Somaeb says the party’s decision was not about political deals or selling its principles, but about its position as an alternative party that believes in contributing to nation-building.
The accusation comes as Somaeb was nominated and approved to serve on the Security Commission alongside Swapo member Paula Kooper.
Somaeb says political parties have different caucuses, agendas, visions and ideologies, and the UDF should not be expected to follow other opposition parties simply because they are in the same political camp.
“The UDF is an alternative party to rule besides Swapo. Seats do not matter, but the party’s contribution towards nation-building is very important,” he says.
Somaeb says Sindano’s experience as a current ECN member was among the reasons it supported his nomination.
He says the ECN is an important institution that cannot effectively operate without a chairperson, arguing that the parliament had already delayed the appointment for about three months.
According to the party, it could not support what it regarded as an unruly situation in which the functioning of an important constitutional institution was being held up.
“Sindano is currently a member of ECN and has experience. That is why he was recommended by the president for endorsement by parliament,” Somaeb says.
However, the Independent Patriots for Change (IPC) has questioned the constitutional and parliamentary implications of the approval.
IPC member Ferdinand Hengombe says a parliamentary majority does not automatically make a process constitutional, lawful or beyond scrutiny.
“A parliamentary majority does not automatically make a process constitutional, lawful or beyond scrutiny,” he says.
He questions what informed the 49 votes, including the UDF’s decision, and whether political interests were placed above the constitutional responsibility of members of parliament (MPs).
Hengombe further questions whether the UDF’s support represented a principled parliamentary decision, particularly as the party had its own candidate, Paula Kooper, nominated and approved for another position.
He says the Security Commission was not an ordinary political appointment and that the parliament should maintain a high standard when dealing with matters involving national security.
“Namibia cannot afford a parliament where numbers replace principle. A majority may win a vote, but it does not have the power to suspend the Constitution,” he says.
Affirmative Repositioning leader Job Amupanda has also condemned the development, accusing the executive of losing the ability to debate matters in the National Assembly without rushing to a vote.
Amupanda says his party will challenge the matter in court, arguing that the approval was unconstitutional.
“We are going to court. We wanted them to do that exactly.
We were denied the records and our lawyers are at it,” he says.
Meanwhile, Swanu of Namibia president Evilastus Kaaronda says democracy does not always produce outcomes that everyone finds acceptable.
“Democracy works in ways that we may not always find palatable.
Each political party represented in parliament has its own agenda and relationships. The UDF is no exception,” he says.
