The Presidency has acknowledged growing concern over the leaking of key presidential decisions on public platforms before they are officially announced, saying the trend reflects the challenges of managing information in a fast-moving and open democratic society.
The issue has drawn attention in recent months, with sensitive decisions and internal discussions increasingly appearing online ahead of formal communication, raising questions about internal controls and the integrity of officials in the presidency cycle. Responding to media questions, Presidential spokesperson Jonas Mbambo said the Presidency remains committed to ensuring that all decisions of the Head of State are communicated through proper and authorised platforms.
“The Presidency remains committed to ensuring that official information and decisions of the Head of State are communicated through the appropriate and authorised channels in a timely and professional manner,” Mbambo said.
He, however, admitted that despite these efforts, leaks do occur.
“As is the case in many institutions operating in today’s fast-paced information environment, there are unfortunately instances where information reaches the public domain prematurely through unofficial channels before formal communication processes have been concluded,” he explained.
Mbambo stressed that such actions undermine established procedures and expectations within government.
“The Presidency expects all individuals entrusted with institutional information to uphold the highest standards of professionalism, discipline and respect for official communication processes, particularly in matters involving sensitive information intended for formal internal circulation and official release,” he said.
He added that internal safeguards are in place to protect official processes, although he did not elaborate on specific mechanisms.
Analysts cite political and social factors
Providing further insight, media expert and political analyst Ben Mulongeni said information leaks are not unique to Namibia but are common in democratic systems where institutions consist of people from diverse political and social backgrounds.
“A multi-party democracy is an open society where people come from diverse groups and interests. You don’t know whether everyone employed is a loyal supporter of the President or the ruling party,” Mulongeni said.
He explained that government institutions are not composed solely of loyal supporters, increasing the likelihood of information being shared outside official channels.
“There might be people who give information to the opposition, to the media, or to others for their own reasons. That is one factor — the issue of loyalty,” he said.
Mulongeni added that internal political dynamics can also play a role, noting that divisions within parties may contribute to the problem. “Even within the ruling party, there are factions. Some individuals may want to make the President look bad or weaken certain positions,” he said.
Beyond political interests, Mulongeni pointed to financial motives as another possible driver of leaks. “Sometimes, people may be promised money to release information that is shocking or damaging, either to create confusion or to attack the President,” he said.
He cautioned that stricter vetting of staff could raise concerns about fairness and political bias.
“If you try to tighten control too much, you may be accused of targeting people who are seen as not loyal,” he explained. However, he suggested that one practical way to reduce speculation and limit the impact of leaks is for government to communicate decisions more quickly and transparently.
“When decisions are made, they should be announced immediately. If you delay, people will create their own stories, explanations and even conspiracy theories,” Mulongeni said.
Security concerns
Criminal intelligence analyst, retired Major General James Tjivikua, warned that the leakage of classified or sensitive government information is a serious offence with potential national security consequences.
“Disclosing state secrets or information is a serious matter. It involves the unauthorised release of classified, sensitive national security information or any other information without authorisation,” Tjivikua said. He added that such actions can carry severe legal consequences.
“This often leads to severe legal consequences, including imprisonment. It is a criminal act to leak classified intelligence, documents or information that could harm national interests,” he said. Tjivikua further cautioned that liability may apply even beyond intentional disclosure.
“It is also unlawful to leak, pass, or in some cases even handle classified information improperly, whether intentional or not,” he explained.
Confidentiality and executive privilege
Tjivikua also pointed to the concept of executive privilege, saying heads of state may, in certain cases, withhold or control sensitive information to protect government functions. “While the President may be committed to open communication, engagement with the media is expected to occur through designated official channels and not through leaks,” he said.
He added that in many systems, presidents have broad authority over senior security appointments.
“In some contexts, a President may invoke privilege to protect confidential communication if disclosing it would harm government functions,” Tjivikua said.
He explained that senior security officials often serve at the discretion of the Head of State.
“High-ranking security officials often serve ‘at the pleasure’ of the President, meaning they can be removed for any reason, or as part of routine security restructuring,” he said. He warned that any leakage from State House or security structures is treated as a serious breach.
“Information leakages from State House are not allowed and are considered serious breaches of security and confidentiality,” Tjivikua added.
Media freedom and responsibility
At the same time, Tjivikua emphasised the importance of press freedom, noting that it remains a cornerstone of democratic accountability.
“Freedom of speech and the press, as outlined in Article 21 of the Namibian Constitution, provides the foundation for media scrutiny,” he said. He added that journalists and citizens have a duty to hold leaders accountable.
“The press and citizens have the right to seek information and hold leaders accountable, especially on issues of public interest such as resources and governance,” he said.
“But leakages from higher offices, in this case the Office of the President, must be avoided at all costs to mitigate the risk of compromising national interests and institutional trust,” Tjivikua said.