Iuze Mukube
Vice President and President-elect Netumbo Nandi-Ndaitwah says she has no knowledge of international agreements the Namibian government signed pertaining to the red line.
Last week, Affirmative Repositioning (AR) leader Job Amupanda has in his continuing fight in court for the removal of the Veterinary Cordon Fence (VCF) running across northern Namibia, notoriously known as the red line, summoned two witnesses to take the stand on his behalf in the High Court proceedings, which start today.
Nandi-Ndaitwah was subpoenaed in her official capacity as the former Minister of International Relations and Cooperation and in her portfolio as the country’s Vice President, to testify.
Meanwhile, erstwhile justice minister and Law Reform Commission chairperson Sacky Shanghala, one of the alleged masterminds behind the Fishrot corruption case, is also expected to appear in his previous capacities.
In contrast to Shanghala, who has not indicated whether he will be attending, Nandi-Ndaitwah filed a countersuit in response to the subpoena.
The application seeks the setting aside of the President-elect’s summons to appear in court to provide testimony for the hearing.
Her application was supported by the fact that the High Court Act allows the court to cancel summons if a person is unable to give evidence or produce relevant documents to the issue in the proceedings.
“It will be seen that the legal practitioners for the first respondent [Amupanda] intend to ask me questions at the trial about international agreements that the government claims would be affected if the VCF is removed,” Nandi-Ndaitwah asserts in her papers.
“Significantly, I am not subpoenaed to bring along and produce at the trial any documents. I have no personal knowledge of the negotiation and signature of the international agreements alluded to in annexure ‘K 1’ hereto.
Agreements of the nature mentioned are negotiated and signed by the line ministers, for example the minister responsible for agriculture”, reads her particulars.
She further said the subpoena is an abuse of the court’s process by Amupanda, because in November last year, the court had granted leave to the respondent to appeal the protective costs order which had been made in his favour in October 2024.
This rule entailed a no order of costs regarding the action, meaning Amupanda was not liable to pay anything to the sued parties, regardless of the outcome of the matter.
Furthermore, Nandi-Ndaitwah contends that the court had ruled that all subpoenas summoning witnesses to give evidence at the trial had to be issued and served on or before 13 December 2024, and in addition that such subpoenaed witnesses had to appear in court on 13 December 2024.
But instead, Amupanda served these on 16 January this year for the witnesses to appear on 20 January, with his application for a vacation of trial date pending, and the appeal lodged on the no costs rule in his favour by the respondents, she submitted.
Nandi-Ndaitwah said Amupanda should be put on terms to withdraw the impugned subpoena, or provide reasons to the satisfaction of her legal practitioners as to why it is not an abuse as mentioned before.
“He [Amupanda] intends to embarrass me by the impugned subpoena and the ensuing media spectacle at court. Amupanda cannot hide behind this fig leaf of an explanation to hide his ulterior purpose mentioned,” she said.
Nandi-Ndaitwah emphasised that she had no dealings with the red line matter during her tenure as minister of international relations and cooperation.
She added that any trade agreements relevant to the main action squarely fall within the ambit of the minister of Agriculture, Water and Land Reform, Calle Schlettwein.
The matter is scheduled to start today, and run until 31 January 2025.
-mukubeiuze@gmail.com