Extraordinary congress lawsuit could ‘embarrass’ Swapo

Swapo should have heeded calls to stick to its constitution and held an extraordinary congress in prescribed time following the death of its leader Hage Geingob, instead of enduring a potential ‘embarrassing’ court order to convene such congress, its veteran Nahas Angula opined.

The former prime minister was reacting to the filing of an application in the High Court last week, in which dissatisfied party members seek an order compelling the party to hold an extraordinary congress confirming the party's presidential candidate for the 2024 election.

The case is brought by Swapo members Reinhold Shipwikineni, Petrus Shituula, Joshua Martins, Erich Shivute and Aina Angula. The five are represented by lawyer Richard Metcalfe.

The extraordinary congress is also sought to elect the party’s new president, following Geingob’s death from cancer on 4 February. Officially, Swapo vice-president Netumbo Nandi-Ndaitwah is the party’s presidential candidate.

Article 15 (9) of the party’s constitution requires that, under circumstances such as the death of the party head, the central committee – the highest decision-making body between congresses – must call an elective extraordinary congress within three months. But some in the party did not want to take that chance and lay ground for surprise candidates who may have emerged and won against Nandi-Ndaitwah.

Therefore, the central committee decided that the extraordinary congress will only take place in April 2025, a decision the court applicants deem a violation of the party constitution.

The Pendukeni solution

In March, former Swapo secretary-general Pendukeni Iivula-Ithana moved that the central committee must resolve to back Nandi-Ndaitwah as sole candidate for the party presidency, which she urged must be endorsed by an extraordinary congress. This is because a party president is only elected by a regular congress, or an extraordinary one.

Iivula-Ithula urged that the extraordinary congress be held within the prescribed 90 days, adding that only convening in 2025 would violate the party constitution.

Approached for comment yesterday, Angula said: “The Pendukeni solution was the best. She was saying ‘let’s go to the extraordinary congress with Netumbo as our sole candidate. In one or two hours, you’re done and, d'accord, you have your legitimate leader. Why should anyone resist to be properly endorsed? No one opposed Pendukeni’s idea to back Netumbo as a sole candidate”.

He said the lawsuit, if successful, would lead to ‘serious embarrassment’.

“It [the court case] is disturbing to some of us. I hope the party would not be forced to have an extraordinary congress by the court,” he said.

He continued: “The problem is that the party leaders are being surrounded and misled by people who are more concerned with personal interests than the ideals of the party.”

Gross violation

Independent political analyst Rui Tyitende said those pushing the extraordinary congress to 2025 were doing so because of a personal agenda.

“It is a subtle message to Netumbo that says ‘I made sure you do not go through the process of an extraordinary congress, so please do not forget me once you become head of state’,” he remarked.

“This gross violation of the party constitution is nothing new to Swapo. We have seen it morphing into institutions of the state. So, Swapo is - to a large extent - a party state; the party and the state have become intertwined.”

He added: “As a person who had been paraded as ‘clean, not corrupt and principled’, the mutilation of the party constitution is a bad precedent for Netumbo to start with. She will need to reward the sycophants and political vultures that unethically pushed for this political and legal anomaly.”

As of yesterday, Swapo had not yet filed opposing affidavits to the High Court application. The party is expected to do so soon in order to avoid a default judgment against it.