Uakutura Kambaekua

Despite the nationwide commemorations of Genocide Remembrance Day on 28 May, some local groups continue to call for separate dates to honour the specific historical experiences of affected communities.

Debate over how best to honour the victims of the 1904–1908 genocide remains ongoing among certain traditional authorities, notably the Landless People’s Movement (LPM), the Ovaherero Traditional Authority (OTA), and factions of the Nama Traditional Leaders Association (NTLA).

There is notable tension between government’s approach and demands from traditional authorities and activists who argue for recognition of the genocide as two distinct historical events.

Government designated 28 May as Genocide Remembrance Day to establish a unified national day of mourning. 

The date was chosen to commemorate the closure of concentration camps, marking the end of  the systematic extermination by the German imperial government.

However, calls for separate commemorations continue to intensify.
deputy chairperson of the Ovaherero Genocide Foundation and Human Rights Desk leader for the LPM, Joyce Muzengua, said meaningful progress in Namibia’s reparations movement depends on understanding the nature of genocide.

Muzengua told Nampa that the LPM continues to lead in public advocacy and key national litigation efforts.
“As far as commemorations are concerned, it is very important that we know what we are commemorating. 

The 28th of May does not commemorate the genocide; it is a day or an event that was part of the genocide,” she said.
“The Nama genocide and the Herero genocide are not one genocide. 

Those are two genocides that occurred against two different ethnic groups, where they were selectively targeted as such. Therefore, they must not be treated as one,” she said.
Muzengua said although the broader event may be viewed collectively, the memories and impacts differ between the two communities.

“We should not necessarily be lumped into one day. Let the Namas commemorate it within the bounds of their traditions and how they did it,” she said. 

Distinct 

She emphasised that separate commemorations would highlight that the genocidal acts against the Ovaherero and Nama were initiated through different colonial orders and unfolded over distinct periods.

Muzengua maintained that 2 October, the date in 1904 when General Lothar von Trotha issued the extermination order against the Ovaherero, is the most historically significant day for reflection.

Similarly, she argued that 22 April 1905, when a comparable order was issued against the Nama, is the appropriate date to acknowledge their specific experiences of genocide.

Muzengua said 28 May diminishes the unique trauma of each community by merging their experiences into a single closure date, adding that genuine restorative justice requires recognition of their distinct histories and sovereignty.
“The government must follow that. 

Let the Hereros commemorate how they did it, within the confines of their traditions and customs, and the government must follow that,” she said.

She added that the debate reflects a broader struggle over historical narratives and national identity, noting that while government seeks to create a unified national memory, many traditional leaders argue that a “one-size-fits-all” approach fails to adequately address the unique atrocities suffered by their ancestors.
Technical advisor and project coordinator for genocide reparations at the NTLA, Johannes Ortmann, said both the NTLA and OTA oppose government’s designation of 28 May as the official genocide remembrance day. 

1893.

He said some community members advocate for 12 April, commemorating the 1893 extermination order against Hendrik Witbooi and his people, as the true beginning of the genocide.

Although 28 May marks the closure of concentration camps in 1908, Ortmann argued that the date symbolises the beginning of “slave camps”, where their ancestors were forced into labour on their own stolen land, representing continued suffering rather than liberation.

“We must recognise that 2 October 1904 marks the extermination order issued against the Ovaherero people, while 22 April 1905 marks the order issued against the Nama people. 

Notably, the extermination order against the Nama people has never been formally rescinded to this day. These were not merely singular tragic events; they were deliberate legal acts of state-sanctioned extermination,” he said.
Ortmann said the push to recognise 12 April as significant for the Nama stems from a history of dispossession.

He advocated for a remembrance structure that acknowledges unrescinded legal instruments and honours the experiences of targeted communities.
He noted that on 12 April 1893, Curt von François launched the first extermination campaign against the indigenous people of South West Africa, specifically targeting Hendrik Witbooi and his community.

The date, he said, was proposed following extensive consultations among affected communities, as it represents the beginning of the systematic violence they endured.

“In contrast, 28 May was presented to Parliament by the president as a ‘unified day’ of commemoration. 

This date commemorates the 1908 announcement of the closure of concentration camps. However, this framing is deeply misleading,” he said.
“The closure of these camps did not signify liberation; rather, it transitioned these sites into slave camps.

Following the closure, our people, including our grandmothers, were forced into unpaid or exploited labour, working in kitchens and on the very lands that had been stolen from them,” he added.
Ortmann said government’s choice of 28 May as a unified date seeks to combine various dates linked to German attacks on the Nama and Ovaherero communities. -Nampa