EDITOR
Last week, Minister of Industries, Mines and Energy, Modestus Amutse, tabled the Petroleum (Exploration and Production) Amendment Bill, which seeks to transfer certain powers from the Minister to the President.
If passed, the Bill will effectively give President Netumbo Nandi-Ndaitwah firm control of the upstream petroleum industry. This would be in addition to the authority she already exercises as Head of State, with executive powers over ministries through delegation.
Among other provisions, the Bill proposes transferring powers from the Minister of Industries, Mines and Energy to the Director-General of the Upstream Petroleum Unit in the Office of the President. It also seeks to shift powers from the Commissioner for Petroleum Affairs to the Deputy Director-General of the same Unit.
In essence, the Bill amends the Petroleum (Exploration and Production) Act of 1991 and introduces several significant changes. One of the major proposals is to formalise the establishment of the Upstream Petroleum Unit as a regulatory authority housed in the Office of the President. The Unit will be led by a Director-General and Deputy Director-General, who will oversee all upstream petroleum operations in the country.
Despite the motivations advanced by Amutse, some critical voices in Namibia are concerned that the proposed amendments could weaken parliamentary oversight and accountability over the executive, particularly in such a strategic and lucrative sector.
On the surface, the reasons given by both President Nandi-Ndaitwah and Amutse appear well-intentioned. The stated aim is to ensure that when oil revenues begin to flow, all Namibians benefit from the country’s natural wealth. That is a noble objective.
However, a closer reading of the proposed legislation raises an important question: are we shaping laws to suit individuals rather than strengthening institutions?
This is not the path Namibia should take.
Laws and institutions must outlive individuals. They must be designed to serve the greater good — not only for today, but for generations to come.
While the current President may act in good faith, constitutions and legal frameworks are not drafted for one leader. No one can predict how future presidents may exercise such concentrated powers over a highly lucrative industry.
The African continent offers cautionary tales. In Equatorial Guinea, long-serving President Teodoro Obiang Nguema Mbasogo and his family have maintained tight control over oil resources, a system widely criticised for patronage and the exclusion of ordinary citizens. Obiang has amassed immense personal wealth in the process.
Closer to home, Angola experienced significant hemorrhaging of national resources during the tenure of Eduardo dos Santos, with billions flowing to cronies and family members through the oil sector.
Namibia has built a reputation as a shining example of constitutionalism. It possesses one of the strongest constitutions on the continent. That framework already provides the necessary checks, balances and governance mechanisms to ensure natural resources are managed responsibly.
President Nandi-Ndaitwah does not need extraordinary centralisation of power to realise her vision of shared prosperity. Effective delegation, strong institutions and robust parliamentary oversight are sufficient safeguards to ensure that Namibia’s oil wealth benefits all its people.
In matters of national resources, prudence must prevail over personality.
COMMENTS