Nuusita Ashipala
Omhedi-A group of 21 people from Ohakafiya village in Ohangwena Region could be charged for contempt of court for -defying a court order interdicting them from acting on behalf of the Oukwanyama Traditional Authority (OTA) and instigating the populace against the OTA.
The High Court last year interdicted the group against appointing villagers as headmen, and printing stamps or any official documents.
The court ordered the group to settle the N$75,000 legal costs in four instalments.
However, despite the interdict, the group is said to have convened illegal meetings on behalf of OTA between the end of last year and this year.
OTA legal representative Silas Kishi Shakumu told a media briefing on Wednesday that the group could be criminally charged if there is enough evidence to warrant an application for contempt of court.
“This is a clear indication that this group has no regard for the law. If it is true that they are indeed engaging in unlawful activities … then it is a clear-cut case of contempt of court,” said Shakumu sternly.
Shakumu urged the public to refrain from associating with the concerned group and to rather work hand in hand with the OTA.
Shakumu also brought to the fore that the OTA has settled all legal cases it faced within the last three years.
Shakumu said three traditional councillors who have been fighting the OTA over their dismissal have been finally dismissed following a Supreme Court ruling.
The councillors are Sipora Dan Weyulu at Ohaingu, Hangula Vatilifa for Okelemba and George Hikumwah of Ongha.
The three were found guilty of convening illegal meetings, unlawfully inspecting the OTA’s bank account and using ill-obtained information for ulterior motives.
They had also accused the senior traditional councillor and OTA spokesperson George Nelulu of embezzling funds.
Shakumu said although the three traditional councillors had successfully appealed for a review that the High Court set aside the verdict, the OTA appealed to the Supreme Court, which found that the OTA had acted within its rights to dismiss them.