Hertta-Maria Amutenja
Windhoek City Police deputy chief for operations, senior superintendent Eliaser Iiyambo, and his brother Simon have appealed a High Court ruling that ordered them to vacate land they seized from their late uncle’s widow.
The case stems from the death of dentist Daniel Uutoni in March 2019.
Uutoni had married Aili Ndapandameme Iilende in 2018, and the couple lived at their homestead in Okathitukambanda village near Okahao.
After his death, the Iiyambo brothers allegedly evicted Iilende and her three children from the family homestead, locked the properties, and began occupying them.
In October 2020, the Ongandjera Traditional Authority, under King Johannes Mupiya, ruled that Iilende was entitled to remain on the land as the surviving spouse, in line with the Communal Land Reform Act.
The authority ordered that she be given peaceful possession of the Olundjinda homestead and the Etunda farming unit. The brothers refused to comply, forcing Iilende, the Traditional Authority, the Omusati Communal Land Board, and Uutoni’s estate to approach the Oshakati High Court.
On 24 July 2025, High Court judge David Munsu ruled in Iilende’s favour. He ordered the Iiyambo brothers to return keys to the Olundjinda homestead and hand over vacant possession of both the homestead and the Etunda farming unit within ten days.
The court authorised the deputy sheriff to assist Iilende if the brothers failed to comply and ordered the eviction of all occupants from the disputed land.
The brothers were also instructed to pay the legal costs of Iilende, the Ongandjera Traditional Authority, the Omusati Communal Land Board, and Uutoni’s estate.
The brothers lodged their appeal in the Supreme Court on 7 August 2025.
Through their lawyers, Slogan Mathues & Associates, they argue that the High Court erred in law and fact.
They claim Munsu misdirected himself by finding that Iilende’s case was based on unlawful dispossession rather than the ratification of customary land rights.
They say Iilende was not in possession of the disputed land at the time of the alleged dispossession, pointing out that she lived and worked in Oshakati and only visited occasionally.
They further argue that the Etunda farming unit could not have been in her possession because it contained no movable property and could not be locked.
The brothers also contend that the consent granted by the Ongandjera Traditional Authority for Iilende to claim the land was never ratified by the Omusati Communal Land Board, making it legally invalid.
They argue that Dr Uutoni was never allocated customary land rights at Olundjinda, meaning the Traditional Authority could not reallocate such rights to his widow.
The Iiyambo brothers are now asking the Supreme Court to set aside the High Court ruling, dismiss Iilende’s claim, and order her to pay the legal costs of the case, including those of two counsel.
