Brain Xamseb 

It is true that the President is assisted in the execution of his functions by members of the Cabinet, whom he appoints and delegates, but delegation does not mean abdication of responsibility. 

The ultimate buck to ensure a holistic well-governed country stops with the President. 

However, some critics may have been confusing the President’s discharge of his mandated national functions at regional and international levels through missions with the question of service delivery and timeous responses to challenges as they crop up within the country. 

This is the case, judging from one newspaper’s quoting of Job Amupanda, the AR’s chief activist, who filmed some rats at the Katutura Intermediate Hospital and remarked afterwards, “It is heartbreaking and horrible; we are a country on its knees with no direction. The country is on autopilot...”, adding, “it is a horrible state of affairs. We once had a country. We are now left with a shadow of a country, a travesty of justice and a betrayal of the promise of liberation.”  

Unmistakably, the question of service delivery is paramount to effective governance, and the fact that the President is travelling to attend to “high issues” does not need to preclude the effective delivery of services at home. 

The reason for various offices, ministries and agencies, headed by respective heads, such as ministers and executive directors, who are under the overall auspices of the prime minister, is to ensure that effective service delivery proceeds at all times without any hitches, regardless of whether the President is in Namibia, at the UN, in the United Arab Emirates or Davos. 

The AR’s chief activist, being understandably a youthful firebrand, who would like to see change as in yesterday, is overstretching the truth here. 

Things have not fallen apart in Namibia; Namibia is not a failed state. 

That is why we still have law and order, and all the services are operating in Namibia. 

We don’t have chaos and a complete breakdown of society. We still have a substantive country and not a shell or shadow thereof.

Also, claiming that we are on our knees with no direction is a grossly over-subjective exaggeration. 

Yes, we are not yet quite where we want to be as a country with a fast-growing economy, full employment and prosperity for all – but definitely, we have direction under the current President and government; we have a vision (Vision 2030) and a strategy (HPPI & II) where we would want to see the country going, and there are tangible efforts to better the lives of our people, so there is no autopilot situation. 

Also, the AR’s chief activist should not forget that during the initial stages of the Geingob presidency, some protagonists, including AR, had put into place a strategy of civil disobedience to make the country ungovernable by grabbing land and erecting shacks all over the country and thereby trying to stymify the operations of the administration. 

So, whatever governance shortcomings we may find today should be co-owned by AR as the original sponsor of the anti- Geingob administration civil disobedience campaign. 

However, if it is indeed true that there are rats all over the Katutura Intermediary Hospital, which I am loath to acknowledge then. 

In that case, the “hammer of accountability in action” has to come down methodically – hard and fast without any excuses on those who have allowed such a shameful and embarrassing situation. 

This is not the first time we are hearing of rats in the Katutura hospital; thus, there can be no diplomatic whitewash. 

Starting from the supervisors in the ward, the medical superintendent, all the way to the directors, the executive director and the line ministers, action must be taken. 

Who is to institute such an action? 

At the executive director level, the ED has to do the administrative sanction towards his/her management.

 At the ministerial level, the minister is to sanction the ED via the secretary to Cabinet and the prime minister. 

However, should these two people fail to execute the required actions, it is the job of the prime minister as the engine of the civil service, when non-performance and dereliction of duty become obvious, to summon the minister, query him/her and give marching orders to rectify the situation within a given timeframe and report back. 

The prime minister will appraise the President on such actions and keep him in the loop throughout. 

Should the minister in question not bother to deal with the situation as instructed, the prime minister is the one to recommend to the President that the minister has consistently failed to perform as expected and needs to be dismissed or shifted elsewhere. 

This is where the President would come in – and based on the recommendation of the prime minister deal with the specific minister, either through a Cabinet reshuffle or altogether constructive dismissal, depending on the severity of non-performance. 

Without such harsh “accountability in action”, the wheels of governmental administrative effectiveness will be stymied.  

At the political level, unexpected, regular or midterm Cabinet reshuffles are the most effective tools to keep ministers on their best performance toes – and the same would apply at the administrative level with executive directors and parastatal CEOs. 

Once people comfortably gestate for long periods in their positions, that is the beginning of all sorts of non-performance and other unwanted practices. 

In cases of deliberate service failure, “accountability” in action should be administered immediately and non-performers brought to book for sovereigns to be happy. 

The happiness, contentment and prosperity of the people of Namibia are the singular most important denominator of successful governance.