… TRADITIONAL LEADERS WANTS PARAMOUNT CHIEFTANCY AXED
By Koviao Matuzee
A growing coalition of prominent traditional leaders representing key royal interests within the OvaHerero Traditional Authority (OTA) structure is calling for the abolition, downgrading, or radical restructuring of OvaHerero paramount chieftaincy title, arguing that the
institution has become a source of prolonged division and no longer reflects the community’s original customary governance system.
The calls come at a volatile moment, as a disputed succession battle over the paramount chieftaincy is currently before the courts, pitting competing claimants against each other. The case is said to have exposed deep fractures within traditional leadership circles and reignited long-standing debates over legitimacy and authority.
Some traditional leaders maintain that OvaHerero governance was historically decentralized, with royal houses exercising authority independently under their respective chiefs, without subordination to a single overarching paramount authority.
Several leaders say the modern structure has instead created what they describe as a permanent site of contestation, where succession disputes are repeatedly escalated into national legal battles.
One senior traditional figure, speaking on condition of anonymity due to the sensitivity of the matter, said the institution has “lost its unifying purpose and the current arrangement has not brought cohesion. It has created parallel claims, endless disputes, and legal confrontation. That is not traditional stability.”
TRIPARTITE DIVIDE
Within the emerging internal debate, three distinct positions have taken shape among royal houses, some are calling for the complete scrapping of the paramount chieftaincy, arguing that it no longer has a legitimate basis in customary governance and should be dissolved in favour of fully independent royal houses.
A second faction is pushing for a major structural downgrade, proposing that the paramount chief role be reduced to a ceremonial cultural position without administrative or jurisdictional authority over other chiefs. Meanwhile, a third group remains cautious, advocating for retention of the institution but with urgent reforms, including clearer succession mechanisms to prevent recurring disputes.
The controversy has been intensified by an ongoing court case in which rival claimants are contesting the rightful holder of the top title. Although details remain before the judiciary, the case has drawn significant attention within traditional leadership circles, with both sides presenting competing interpretations of customary law, lineage and historical legitimacy.
KOZONGUIZI COMMISSION
Fuel has also been added to the debate by renewed references to pre-independence governance assessments, commonly referred to in public discourse as the Kozonguizi Commission Report. The commission investigated the status of traditional leaders and customary law, directly informing the Traditional Authorities Act 1995 (Act 17 of 1995). It established the framework for recognizing traditional leadership in post- independence Namibia.
While interpretations differ, some traditional leaders cite the report as evidence that colonial and administrative systems influenced the centralization of traditional authority structures that were originally more decentralized. One elder summed up the mood starkly: “This is no longer only about leadership. It is about whether the system itself can survive in its current form.”
SUBJUDICE
OTA chairperson chief Vipuira Kapuuo had earlier told Confidente that due to the ongoing court case in which academics Hoze Riruako and Mutjinde Katjiua are battling for the legitimacy of the processes that elected or appointed them as paramount chief-designates, he would not comment at this stage. These sentiments were echoed by Katjiua and OvaHerero traditional expert and guru Jonathan Katjimune.
VICES
On his part, Riruako said: “Those who are today calling for the scrapping of the paramount chief position are largely certain royal houses acting in narrow self-interest, alongside those who harbour a broader desire to leave the OvaHerero people without strong, centralized direction. They are, perhaps unknowingly, advocating for the very condition our ancestors sacrificed.”
“I am fully aware of these discussions, as well as the Ministerial efforts currently underway to resolve leadership disputes amongst traditional communities across Namibia. I must state clearly, at the very outset, that leadership disputes are not a condition unique to the OvaHerero people or the OTA. This is a challenge confronting most, if not all, traditional institutions in Namibia and around the world.”
According to him the is a serious problem that has led to paralysis of critical activities across various traditional institutions, robbing their communities of service delivery while their leaders remain entangled in internal feuds and protracted legal battles.
“Most importantly, while these discussions exist, I do not believe they are sincere. They appear to be driven by a sinister agenda, one designed to weaken and marginalize great nations that predate the establishment of Namibia. To question the validity of what those ancestors so carefully and deliberately constructed is not reform. It is an affront to their legacy. “There have been similar attempts both before and after independence, originating from those who sought to elevate their own authority to the level of the paramount chief, or from those who repeatedly tried to usurp the powers or undermine the functions of this position. History has consistently proven those attempts to be misguided, and history will do so again.”
To understand why this institution is irreplaceable, Riruako said, one must understand why it was created, because the men who created it understood something that their critics, even today, fail to grasp. According to him, the OvaHerero people are born into various clans determined by matrilineal lineage and that before the establishment of the position of paramount chief, all OvaHerero people were represented in every sphere of life by the head of their respective clan. He added, because OvaHerero people have intermarried across clans for centuries, many individuals belong to more than one clan, a reality that made purely clan-based leadership inherently limited and, in times of crisis, dangerously inadequate.
Riruako explained that the “underground” calls to abolish or downgrade the title of paramount chief undermine OvaHerero heritage. “To question the validity of what those ancestors so carefully and deliberately constructed is not reform. It is an affront to their legacy,” he added.
ROYALTY
Chief Sam Kambazembi of the Kambazembi Royal House referred Confidente to the Kozonguizi Commission Report, while chief Manase Zeraeua of the Zeraeua Royal House did not respond to questions sent to him. However, chief Tjinaani Maharero of the Maharero Royal House declined to engage in ongoing discussions surrounding the status and relevance of the matter. According to him, the recent debates and alleged calls do not concern the structures represented by the royal house.
“Ombara Maharero remains focused on his responsibilities to his community and the preservation of our cultural dignity, rather than participating in speculative discussions regarding the retirement of traditional titles,” said Hirukuevi Kaapama on behalf of Maharero.
