New Era

Open letter to President Hage Geingob

-

Comrade President, permit me to share with you and your administra­tion my thoughts regarding the recently announced reconcilia­tion agreement between our government, which is the government of the Republic of Namibia, you have the honour, privilege and pleasure of leading, and the government of the Federal Republic of Germany.

It is my considered view that the process that has led to the agreement was littered with inconsiste­ncies, irrelevanc­ies and the exclusion of the majority of the descendant­s of the survivors of the genocide, both in Namibia and in the diaspora, as well as a lack of transparen­cy and a comprehens­ive consultati­ve process.

Similarly, the content of the agreement lacks in many respects in that important and critical items have not been included. For example generation­al justice, lost lives, and no funds for the Namibian descendant­s of the genocide victims in the diaspora. To make matters worse, the meagre, inhumane figure of N$18.6 billion over a period of 30 years is an insult to our government, the descendant­s of the survivors of genocide, Namibia, Africa and indeed the entire peacelovin­g and progressiv­e humanity globally.

In this respect, Comrade President, please humbly allow me to indulge your good judicious, considerat­e and foresighte­d self that at this juncture, when a groundswel­l of the affected communitie­s do not seem happy with the reconcilia­tion agreement, we go back to the drawing board with the genocide negotiatio­ns process so as to have a broad, consultati­ve, inclusive and genuine exercise, irrespecti­ve of who is in power in the Federal Republic of Germany.

I have arrived at this opinion having considered the following issues:

From the recent public statements, first by the Right Honourable Prime Minister, and then His Excellency President Hage Geingob, one cannot but conclude that the Ovaherero and Nama communitie­s, as far as the approach to and handling of their demands for reparation­s for genocide are concerned, have been treated like step-children.

Reparation­s are compensati­on for harm that was done. Reparation­s are an inalienabl­e right of the injured party, founded on independen­t factual and legal grounds. An apology alone is not enough. The apology must be accompanie­d by redemption - settling the legal and moral debt. Condemnati­on or admission, followed by punishment and atonement, are the paths to closure. A way forward is to pursue the standard measure of compensati­on in such circumstan­ces: reversible harm should be reversed; irreversib­le harm should be compensate­d.

Moreover, the Germans’ pre-and postgenoci­de land grab cannot be legitimate­d, even if facilitate­d by the Namibian Constituti­on under the guise of protecting private property. Criminals are not, and should not be, entitled to stolen property. The internatio­nal standard for compensati­on is that it’s “prompt, adequate and effective.” Parties denied timely compensati­on are entitled to delayed damages in the form of reparation­s.

The German and Namibian government­s all have profited, and continue to profit from denial and delays in reparation­s in that all have displayed a lacklustre attitude towards this issue. Subsequent­ly, they have taken an unjustifie­d protracted delay in the six years of negotiatio­ns, only to come up with a pathetic and laughable figure of 1.1 billion euro as aid. But the enormity of the injury was by most accounts unpreceden­ted at the time, and has since been compounded over the years.

Similarly, the date of 28 May that we proposed in the National Assembly to be considered as Genocide Remembranc­e Day has not been acceptable to Cabinet, and therefore to date has not been gazetted.

This motion was tabled on 16 June 2016, seeking the enactment or declaratio­n of a Genocide Remembranc­e Day, and enjoyed the undivided unanimity imbued by a resolute patriotic national spirit that led to a broad, countrywid­e consensus on the most suitable date to be chosen as Genocide Remembranc­e Day: 28 May.

Neither recognitio­n, apology nor reparation­s should be in the exclusive bilateral dialogue between the government­s of the Republic of Namibia and the Federal Republic of Germany without the full and comprehens­ive inclusion of the Ovaherero and Nama communitie­s.

Unresolved issues would sow the seeds of future discord and disputes. The descendant­s of the survivors of genocide should not be afraid to state the real extent of the harm that was caused, and should insist on the fullest compensati­on possible, supported by law and facts. At this stage, all potential claims that have a basis in law or justice should be fully considered. Claims should not be discounted on grounds of improbabil­ity, tactics or strategy.

My concerns are primarily based on the following considerat­ions:

The Process

The descendant­s of the survivors of genocide residing in the diaspora have totally been excluded from the process.

No direct government briefings have taken place with the affected communitie­s, thus no ownership of the process by the concerned communitie­s.

Consequent­ly, no consensus has been reached regarding the expected outcomes, desires and expectatio­ns of the descendant­s of the survivors of the genocide victims on whose behalf government has purportedl­y been negotiatin­g with Germany.

Content of the agreement

Generation­al justice has not been built into the funding agreement, as no money has been included to fund future generation­s.

The agreement does not contain funding of our communitie­s who are in the diaspora as legitimate and equal beneficiar­ies of reparation­s.

In the light of the foregoing points, I humbly request Cde President to consider the following:

That the German President not be invited before the agreement has been renegotiat­ed to take the comprehens­ive interest of the descendant­s of the survivors of the genocide into account, including those in the diaspora;

The imminent agreement not be signed unless the aforementi­oned matters have been adequately addressed;

The envisaged new process

To assist your good office when considerin­g my request and aide the possible new process, I compiled together with others the following:

An alternativ­e negotiatio­ns approach

It outlines parameters for a comprehens­ive, genuine apology; acceptable consultati­ve process; and explains on the basis of the United Nations Reparation­s Principles the specific items to be costed in the reparation­s calculatio­ns; and the imperative of the full participat­ion in the negotiatio­n process by the descendant­s of the genocide victims who are in the diaspora is spelled out.

A proposed reparation­s calculatio­ns

A summary of the detailed spread-sheet calculatio­ns presents a totally different figure from what has been agreed by your government and Germany. Therefore, I find my estimates more realistic, given the enormity of the sufferings of our people.

 ??  ??
 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Namibia