Defamation lawsuits have become a hot topic in Namibia, let alone the world over, as more people find themselves caught on the wrong side of the delicate line between the right to free speech and the right of other people to protect their reputation.
Article 21 of the Namibian Constitution – the supreme law of the land – guarantees every Namibian the right to freedom of expression: “All persons shall have the right to freedom of speech and expression, which shall include freedom of the press and other media.”
However, this freedom is not absolute. When free expression crosses the thin line and harms someone’s reputation, the law steps in to protect the aggrieved party against false and damaging statements.
In today’s world of social media and instant communication, the risks of saying something defamatory have increased dramatically. A careless comment online or an unverified claim can lead to serious legal trouble.
Recent high-profile cases in Namibia highlight how defamation can affect public figures and ordinary citizens alike.
So far, Namibians have witnessed four high-profile defamation lawsuits in recent years, most involving politicians, that have dominated this legal landscape. Notably, two individuals involved in these cases are set to serve as lawmakers in the National Assembly next year.
One of them is activist and Affirmative Repositioning leader Job Amupanda. The controversy stems from a social media post he made on 28 July 2021 about deputy finance minister Maureen Hinda-Mbuende.
Amupanda shared a photo of a woman wearing jeans and sunglasses, and captioned it: “It looks like deputy minister of finance Maureen Hinda during the liberation struggle”. Hinda-Mbuende was livid. Hinda-Mbuende argued that the post was defamatory, claiming it implied promiscuity,
and subjected her to harassment and ridicule.
The court ruled in her favour, ordering Amupanda to pay N$100 000 in damages. The judgement emphasised the importance of protecting the dignity and reputation of public figures, especially those serving the state.
The other casualty was Immanuel Nashinge, the spokesperson for the Independent Patriots for Change (IPC), who was ordered to cough up N$60 000 in monthly installments of N$2 000 to Beata Siteketa, as well as issue an apology to her after comments in a WhatsApp post, where he allegedly referred to Siteketa as a “prostitute”. Siteketa said she would donate the money awarded to Namibia’s Gender-Based Violence Investigation Unit to support victims of abuse.
Another case was of retired nurse Mathilde Kadhikwa, who suffered financial loss of N$773 000 after the High Court in Windhoek ordered her to pay Beata and her businessman husband Shapwa Kamanya for defaming them over their wedding.
Even former First Lady Monica Geingos pursued legal action to defend her character after politician Abed Hishoono made unverified remarks about her.
These examples serve as reminders that no right is absolute, and that freedom of expression comes with responsibilities, especially in the age of social media, where false information spreads rapidly.
It is vividly observed that those who pursued legal action against these defendants did not necessarily want the money, but to drive home the message that allegations made without evidence can carry significant legal and financial consequences.
Therefore, while robust public speech is essential in a democratic society, it must be underlined by truth and accountability.