Govt’s red line ‘gimmicks’ irk Amupanda
Activist Job Amupanda has accused the government of misleading the public on the issue of the veterinary cordon fence, commonly known as the ‘red line’.
He claimed that Cabinet’s recent announcement of a new feasibility study on the removal of the red line is nothing more than a costly repetition of work already completed a decade ago. “The government has decided to gradually remove the red line. But how does it make sense to decide this and then say they need a feasibility study? Are they making a decision, or are they still investigating? This is pure nonsense,” Amupanda said during a press conference in Windhoek yesterday.
Last week, Cabinet approved a phased approach to lifting restrictions imposed by the red line, and announced that its proposed feasibility study is set to be conducted over the next two years to assess the potential impacts of removing the fence.
The study will inform plans for creating disease-free zones within identified areas, including Mangetti, Karikubis, Tsumkwe, Mangetti East farms, Mangetti West, Onalusheshete farms, Ombuga, Omutambo Maowe and Sesfontein.
Outdated colonial mechanism
The red line, a divisive veterinary cordon established during colonial rule, separates northern communal areas from commercial farming regions, largely to prevent the spread of livestock diseases.
However, Amupanda argued that its continued existence is an outdated colonial mechanism that unfairly benefits a privileged few while excluding the majority of Namibians from accessing lucrative export markets.
According to him, a government-commissioned report from 2014 already addressed the very issues Cabinet is now claiming to explore. “There is already a feasibility study - paid for by taxpayers - dating back to 2014. It involved consultations with all stakeholders, cost millions, and resulted in a 300- or 500-page report. What more needs to be studied?” he wanted to know.
He said the decade-old report outlines the implications of the total removal of the red line, suggesting that the government already knows what needs to be done.
“This report has been sitting with the same Cabinet that is now asking for another study. Either they are pretending the original report doesn’t exist, or they’re deliberately trying to stall the process. How does Cabinet, knowing full well that there’s already a report, announce with a straight face that they’re going to conduct another feasibility study? This is an insult to the intelligence of Namibians,” he said.
“The red line was established in 1896 to protect the cattle of German colonisers from rinderpest. It wasn’t meant to protect Namibians or their livestock. So, how can freedom fighters - who supposedly fought for this country’s independence - defend such a relic of colonialism?” Amupanda questioned.
“The red line has always been about white interests, white cattle and the white economy. Defending it today is a betrayal of the very principles of independence,” he added, describing Cabinet’s stance as a “historical disgrace”.
Govt has failed us
“The government has failed its people. It’s protecting a colonial structure that continues to marginalise the majority of our people,” the University of Namibia academic added.
“On one hand, they claim they’re removing the red line, but on the other, they’re commissioning studies that will delay any action for at least two more years. How long are they going to play these games? This is not something we can joke about. The government needs to stop wasting taxpayer money and start implementing the recommendations that have already been made,” he said.
“This government can boast about its exile stories and its struggle for freedom, but when it comes to defending the interests of the people, they are nowhere to be found. The same government that is telling the public one thing is arguing the exact opposite in court. It’s time for the people to see through these lies.”
Amupanda filed a court case to have the red line removed and declared illegal and unconstitutional in May 2021, but the matter suffered a setback earlier this year when the Supreme Court overturned a High Court decision to allow him to provide evidence of his financial resources for a protective costs order.
He filed an application for the order - granted when a case involves matters of public interest, but a party does not have the necessary funds to pay legal costs - last year, saying just the trial over the removal of the red line would cost approximately N$3.56 million in legal fees.
He claimed that Cabinet’s recent announcement of a new feasibility study on the removal of the red line is nothing more than a costly repetition of work already completed a decade ago. “The government has decided to gradually remove the red line. But how does it make sense to decide this and then say they need a feasibility study? Are they making a decision, or are they still investigating? This is pure nonsense,” Amupanda said during a press conference in Windhoek yesterday.
Last week, Cabinet approved a phased approach to lifting restrictions imposed by the red line, and announced that its proposed feasibility study is set to be conducted over the next two years to assess the potential impacts of removing the fence.
The study will inform plans for creating disease-free zones within identified areas, including Mangetti, Karikubis, Tsumkwe, Mangetti East farms, Mangetti West, Onalusheshete farms, Ombuga, Omutambo Maowe and Sesfontein.
Outdated colonial mechanism
The red line, a divisive veterinary cordon established during colonial rule, separates northern communal areas from commercial farming regions, largely to prevent the spread of livestock diseases.
However, Amupanda argued that its continued existence is an outdated colonial mechanism that unfairly benefits a privileged few while excluding the majority of Namibians from accessing lucrative export markets.
According to him, a government-commissioned report from 2014 already addressed the very issues Cabinet is now claiming to explore. “There is already a feasibility study - paid for by taxpayers - dating back to 2014. It involved consultations with all stakeholders, cost millions, and resulted in a 300- or 500-page report. What more needs to be studied?” he wanted to know.
He said the decade-old report outlines the implications of the total removal of the red line, suggesting that the government already knows what needs to be done.
“This report has been sitting with the same Cabinet that is now asking for another study. Either they are pretending the original report doesn’t exist, or they’re deliberately trying to stall the process. How does Cabinet, knowing full well that there’s already a report, announce with a straight face that they’re going to conduct another feasibility study? This is an insult to the intelligence of Namibians,” he said.
“The red line was established in 1896 to protect the cattle of German colonisers from rinderpest. It wasn’t meant to protect Namibians or their livestock. So, how can freedom fighters - who supposedly fought for this country’s independence - defend such a relic of colonialism?” Amupanda questioned.
“The red line has always been about white interests, white cattle and the white economy. Defending it today is a betrayal of the very principles of independence,” he added, describing Cabinet’s stance as a “historical disgrace”.
Govt has failed us
“The government has failed its people. It’s protecting a colonial structure that continues to marginalise the majority of our people,” the University of Namibia academic added.
“On one hand, they claim they’re removing the red line, but on the other, they’re commissioning studies that will delay any action for at least two more years. How long are they going to play these games? This is not something we can joke about. The government needs to stop wasting taxpayer money and start implementing the recommendations that have already been made,” he said.
“This government can boast about its exile stories and its struggle for freedom, but when it comes to defending the interests of the people, they are nowhere to be found. The same government that is telling the public one thing is arguing the exact opposite in court. It’s time for the people to see through these lies.”
Amupanda filed a court case to have the red line removed and declared illegal and unconstitutional in May 2021, but the matter suffered a setback earlier this year when the Supreme Court overturned a High Court decision to allow him to provide evidence of his financial resources for a protective costs order.
He filed an application for the order - granted when a case involves matters of public interest, but a party does not have the necessary funds to pay legal costs - last year, saying just the trial over the removal of the red line would cost approximately N$3.56 million in legal fees.
Comments
Namibian Sun
No comments have been left on this article