PAUL T. SHIPALE (with inputs by Folito Nghitongovali Diawara Gaspar)
When finance minister Ericah Shafudah stood before Parliament on 21 October 2025, her address carried a tone of sober realism. Namibia’s mid-year budget review revealed uncomfortable truths: economic growth is slowing, revenue performance has softened, and public debt continues its upward trajectory. Yet, instead of yielding to populist pressures or political expediency, Shafudah chose a path defined by discipline, recalibration, and credibility.
The mid-year review presented an unchanged expenditure envelope of N$ 89.4 billion, signalling fiscal restraint amid deteriorating conditions. Growth projections for 2025 were revised downward from 4.5% to 3.3%, while public debt rose to N$ 176.3 billion. By September, the government had collected N$ 36.6 billion in revenue, trailing behind last year’s pace, and interest payments climbed to N$ 6.8 billion, further tightening fiscal space.
Faced with these pressures, Shafudah resisted expansionary demands. Instead, she opted for reallocation over expansion, shifting N$ 1.2 billion from underperforming projects and unfilled positions toward priority sectors such as education, health, and disaster relief. This was not austerity for its own sake but a deliberate reordering of national priorities, a recognition that resilience is built not on excess expenditure but on strategic investment in human capital and institutional preparedness.
Her message was unmistakable: the era of easy budgets has ended. Namibia is entering a phase of disciplined governance where fiscal sustainability and policy credibility outweigh short-term populism. For investors and policymakers alike, this signals a leaner environment for capital projects but also one defined by clearer priorities and stronger macroeconomic integrity.
A political shockwave
Just days after the budget review, the principle of discipline extended from the fiscal to the political domain. On 26 October 2025, President Netumbo Nandi-Ndaitwah dismissed Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Industrialisation, Mines and Energy, Natangue Ithete, assuming direct control of the powerful ministry herself. No official explanation was issued, but informed sources cited diplomatic missteps and controversial remarks that strained key relationships, although we now know the reason why Ithete was fired.
Speaking in a video that surfaced from her closed-door address to ministry staff on Monday, President Nandi-Ndaitwah said Ithete went against her directive on upstream oil activities. “There seem to be things happening in this ministry that I am not aware of as the president. We know that when I took over, I said the upstream will fall under the Office of the President,” she said.
She said she had instructed the minister not to approve any new oil blocks or renew existing ones without consultation. “I told the minister that let me first understand, and there should be no renewal; there should be no new block given unless we consult one another,” she said while reading out a media report on why Ithete was fired. We are still wondering, though, why the President didn’t only relieve Ithete from the post as Minister of Mines and Energy, since he seemed to have been struggling there anyway, and keep him as Deputy PM? Somehow we knew someone would question her judgement in appointing him in the first place as Deputy PM and Minister of a powerful portfolio that contributes enormously to our GDP.
Be that as it may, the timing and symbolism were striking. In a week dominated by fiscal restraint and accountability, the President’s decisive move reinforced a broader theme: discipline and credibility have become the new currency of governance. Removing a senior figure from one of the most strategic portfolios of industrialisation, mining, and energy during a period of economic headwinds signalled a leadership determined to consolidate authority, uphold integrity, and demand performance.
However, the consolidation of executive control raises a critical question: can tighter political and fiscal centralisation enhance confidence, or might it risk uncertainty? For investors in Namibia’s resource-dependent sectors, where predictability and policy consistency are essential, the coming months will reveal whether this consolidation yields stability or fosters apprehension.
What emerges, nonetheless, is clear: Namibia is undergoing a governance reset. Shafudah’s budget embodies its economic dimension, a pivot from optimism to realism. President Nandi-Ndaitwah’s intervention illustrates its political dimension, a demonstration that accountability and credibility are no longer optional. In addition, speaking at the launch of the public-private partnership (PPP) forum in Windhoek recently, President Ndaitwah called for a simplified, investor-friendly visa regime, thus following in the footsteps of countries like Mauritius, Rwanda and the United Arab Emirates (UAE), and announced that she was going to set up task forces on economic recovery, health and the housing sector, instructing the Director General of the National Planning Commission to work out the modalities on how to put her idea in motion.
On Tuesday, the Ministry of Finance and the Bank of Namibia (BoN) announced that Namibia had successfully redeemed its second eurobond, valued at US$750 million (approximately N$13.9 billion). The bond represents the largest single debt maturity in the country’s history. “It is a testament to our unwavering commitment to fiscal discipline, strategic foresight, and prudent debt management,” Shafudah said. Together, these actions mark a turning point in which fiscal prudence and political discipline converge to navigate turbulence and restore institutional trust.
Constitutional context of the legal backbone of leadership
To grasp the full significance of these developments, one must turn to the Namibian Constitution, the framework that defines the exercise, limits, and legitimacy of executive power.
The Executive’s Collective Responsibility Article 28(2)
Article 28(2) of the Constitution of the Republic of Namibia (Act 4 of 1990) provides that:
The executive power of the Republic of Namibia shall vest in the President and the Cabinet.”
This provision anchors executive authority in the principle of collective accountability. The President is not a solitary ruler but a constitutional steward acting in concert with the Cabinet and within the parameters of national interest. From this perspective, the dismissal of a senior minister is not merely an assertion of political will but an exercise of constitutional duty — a reaffirmation that leadership entails both authority and responsibility.
Yet Article 28(2) also implies restraint. Executive discretion must operate within the principles of legality, rationality, and proportionality. True constitutional leadership balances firmness with fairness — it uses authority not to command unilaterally, but to safeguard the integrity and credibility of governance itself.
The president’s specific powers and duties article 32(3)
Article 32(3) of the Constitution enumerates the President’s executive powers, including the authority to:
• Appoint and dismiss ministers;
• Direct the activities of the executive;
• Ensure the execution of the Constitution and national laws; and
• Uphold the principles of democracy and justice.
Viewed through this lens, the President’s decision to dismiss a minister is constitutionally sound when it serves the goals of good governance, ministerial accountability, and public integrity. However, the same article implicitly demands transparency and proportionality, ensuring that such actions are guided by constitutional duty, not political expedience.
Where official explanations are absent, the public can still discern the underlying rationale through consistent patterns of governance. In this instance, the government’s alignment around themes of discipline, credibility, and fiscal realism offers a coherent context for understanding the decision — one that reinforces constitutional stewardship over political opportunism.
The constitutional ethic: The rod and the staff
The dual nature of executive authority can be captured in the metaphor: “The rod also needs the staff to be a good shepherd, not just a sheriff.”
• The rod symbolises authority, discipline, and correction – the instruments necessary to enforce constitutional order.
• The staff represents guidance, compassion, and service – the moral responsibility to uplift and protect citizens.
Leadership that wields both instruments judiciously transforms the coercive power of the state into a moral force for public good. In the Namibian context, the current moment calls for such equilibrium: the rod of fiscal and political discipline must be tempered by the staff of empathy, inspiration, inclusivity, transparency, and developmental compassion.
Governance reset as a constitutional test
Both minister Shafudah’s fiscal prudence and President Nandi-Ndaitwah’s political decisiveness reflect a dual movement toward discipline and credibility, but they also test the resilience of Namibia’s constitutional framework. Each action invokes a constitutional principle, but together they demand a deeper inquiry into the evolving ethic of executive governance.
Constitutional provision core value leadership lesson
Article 28(2) Collective executive accountability Exercise power as a shared responsibility, not a personal command.
Article 32(3) Presidential powers and limits Lead decisively, but within constitutional ethics and transparency. Moral Analogy (Rod & Staff) Authority and compassion Be a shepherd of the Republic, not merely its sheriff.
This framework illustrates that discipline in governance is not the antithesis of democracy — it is its safeguard. The Constitution entrusts the executive with the power to act but also with the duty to restrain. The test of Namibia’s governance reset lies precisely in that balance.
The price of credibility as a final reflection
Namibia stands at a juncture where economic realism meets constitutional morality. Fiscal discipline, political accountability, and constitutional integrity now form the three pillars upon which state credibility must rest. The numbers presented by Shafudah may be sobering, and the President’s actions may appear severe, but together they signal a deliberate effort to restore the Republic’s moral and institutional equilibrium.
When the executive exercises power with integrity, restraint, and foresight, it transforms the rod of authority into the staff of stewardship, guiding the Republic not through coercion, but through example. In an era where populism tempts many governments into fiscal and moral excess, Namibia’s leadership appears to be embracing a more demanding, yet nobler path: one where credibility becomes the true measure of power.
If sustained, this commitment could redefine Namibia’s governance ethos not as a search for political advantage, but as a disciplined pursuit of constitutional integrity and public trust. However, our worry is with those undermining the government from within, such as by withholding vital information and withdrawing from taking key decisions just to see others fail. The ultimate lesson is clear: credibility, once lost, exacts a price no budget line can bear.
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed here do not necessarily reflect those of our employers and this newspaper but solely our personal views as citizens and Pan-Africanists.
