The recent Supreme Court ruling makes the need for a new approach particularly urgent.
If the law does not permit competing traditional authorities to be established for the same traditional community, then our future cannot sensibly be built around an endless search for separate statutory recognition.
We need to build space within one community.
That means the recognised Ovambanderu Traditional Authority must also consider what unity requires from it. Reconciliation cannot only place obligations upon those currently outside the recognised structure.
A strong institution should be confident enough to open its doors, listen to criticism and accommodate different constituencies without feeling threatened.
Likewise, leaders and supporters associated with Aletta Nguvauva, Tjingaete Boas, Katutura Tjiramba, Hoveka and others should consider whether the long-term interests of their followers are better served through continued separation or through negotiated participation in a broader Ovambanderu settlement.
Nobody should be required to deny whom they supported. Nobody should be forced to rewrite history.
Nobody should be humiliated. Instead, we should negotiate a framework that recognises the dignity and contribution of the different houses and constituencies while preserving one lawful traditional authority for the community.
Such a framework could provide meaningful advisory and customary roles for respected leaders and elders.
It could establish representation from different geographical areas, royal houses, women and youth.
It could create transparent procedures for succession, dispute resolution and constitutional interpretation so that future disagreements do not automatically become court cases.
We should also revisit the Ovambanderu Constitution collectively.
If ambiguities have contributed to conflict, then the answer should not be competing constitutions and authorities.
The community can undertake an inclusive process to strengthen its own constitutional arrangements, while respecting the law and customary traditions. Reconciliation will require humility from everyone.
Those who believe they have been legally vindicated must resist triumphalism.
Those whose legal efforts have failed must resist permanent withdrawal.
Leaders must sometimes accept that preserving a people is more important than preserving a position.
Our ancestors did not survive so that their descendants could perfect the art of dividing themselves.
One Ovambanderu community can contain many respected voices.
Unity is not silence. Unity is the decision that disagreement will no longer make us strangers. Nobody needs to surrender their dignity.
What we need to surrender is the idea that Ovambanderu can only coexist by living permanently apart.
This opinion is written in the author’s personal capacity as a contribution to dialogue, unity and reconciliation among the Ovambanderu.
ARTICLE 4: LET US CALL AN OVAMBANDERU UNITY AND RECONCILIATION CONFERENCE
The conversation about Ovambanderu unity must move beyond speeches and social-media discussions. If we believe reconciliation is necessary, we must create a practical process through which it can happen. I propose the convening of an Ovambanderu Unity and Reconciliation Conference. Such a conference should not begin with the election or endorsement of a chief. If leadership positions become the first agenda item, the process may collapse before trust has been established. The first purpose must be to bring Ovambanderu back to one table. Before the conference, a small independent preparatory committee should be established. It should consist of respected elders, clergy, women, youth, professionals and customary-law experts who are acceptable across the main constituencies. Their first responsibility should be listening. They should separately consult the recognised Ovambanderu Traditional Authority and representatives associated with Aletta Nguvauva, Tjingaete Boas, Katutura Tjiramba, Hoveka and other relevant Ovambanderu constituencies. Each group should be asked three questions: What happened? What continues to hurt? What would make genuine reconciliation possible? Those submissions should then inform the agenda of the unity conference. The conference should recognise that reconciliation is not the same as determining who was historically right about every dispute. Some questions may never receive unanimous answers. Instead, delegates should identify what can be agreed upon now. Can we agree that we are one people? Can we agree that our children should not inherit our divisions? Can we agree that the dignity of all Ovambanderu houses and constituencies should be respected? Can we agree that future leadership disputes should be resolved through clear customary and constitutional mechanisms before litigation becomes necessary? Can we agree upon common development priorities? From there, the conference could adopt an Ovambanderu Unity Covenant. That covenant could commit leaders and community members to peaceful dispute resolution, mutual respect, preservation of culture, youth development, transparent traditional governance and the rejection of factional humiliation. It could also establish a permanent reconciliation council to address unresolved grievances. Most importantly, the conference should launch a development agenda. Ovambanderu unity must produce tangible benefits. We should consider a scholarship fund, agricultural development programmes, youth entrepreneurship, cultural documentation, preservation of historical sites, support for vulnerable families and mechanisms for collective investment. Imagine an annual Ovambanderu gathering attended by everybody. Imagine our different leaders standing on one platform. Imagine children who know the names of their ancestors but do not need to know which faction their parents belonged to. This is achievable, but someone must begin. Government may facilitate if invited. Churches and respected national figures may assist. But the process must belong to Ovambanderu themselves. We should not wait for another funeral, another dispute or another court case to remind us that we are related. The recent Supreme Court ruling may have clarified what cannot be done under the law. Our responsibility is now to decide what can be done through courage. Let us call the conference. Let us come without demanding surrender. Let us bring our grievances, but also bring solutions. And when we leave that gathering, let us leave with something our community has needed for many years: a road back to one another. This opinion is written in the author’s personal capacity as a contribution to dialogue, unity and reconciliation among the Ovambanderu.
ARTICLE 5: OUR CHILDREN SHOULD INHERIT OPPORTUNITIES, NOT OUR ENEMIES
Every generation receives an inheritance from those before it. Some inherit land, institutions, businesses, education and cultural knowledge. Others inherit unresolved conflicts. The question facing Ovambanderu today is what we intend to leave to our children. Our leadership disputes have lasted long enough that a young person born around the time of the death of Chief Munjuku II Nguvauva is now approaching adulthood. For that generation, division is not merely history. It has been part of the environment in which they grew up. We must not normalise this. Our young people face challenges far greater than the leadership quarrels of their elders. They need quality education, employment, access to land, agricultural opportunities, entrepreneurship, technological skills and a strong sense of cultural identity. They need elders who can teach them where they come from without instructing them whom to hate. This is why the current legal developments should become a turning point. If the Supreme Court’s interpretation of the Traditional Authorities Act makes competing statutory authorities for the same community untenable, then the sensible response is not to search for another legal formula to continue separation. It is to invest in reunification. Imagine if Ovambanderu established a serious education and scholarship fund supported by businesspeople, professionals, farmers and traditional institutions. Imagine a database of young Ovambanderu graduates and professionals so that we deliberately connect talent to opportunities. Imagine agricultural cooperatives helping farmers with markets, livestock improvement and modern production. Imagine collective investment in land and enterprises. Imagine recording the oral histories of our elders before invaluable knowledge disappears. Imagine strengthening Otjiherero among children growing up in towns and outside Namibia. Imagine cultural festivals where the descendants of different leadership constituencies dance together without anyone asking which side they represent. That is the Ovambanderu future worth fighting for. Traditional leadership remains important. Our customary institutions connect us to our ancestors and give structure to our community. But leadership exists for people; people do not exist merely for leadership. The measure of a traditional institution should therefore include what it contributes to the wellbeing of its community. A reunited Ovambanderu community could become a formidable social and developmental force in Omaheke and throughout Namibia. We are not too few to achieve great things. But we are too few to continue dividing ourselves indefinitely. To the younger generation I say: learn the history carefully. Respect your elders. Understand why disagreements happened. But do not assume that loyalty requires inheriting every quarrel. You have the right to build friendships across the lines created by your parents and grandparents. You have the right to imagine an Ovambanderu identity bigger than factions. And those of us who came before you have a responsibility to make that possible. One day, none of today’s leaders or commentators will be here. Our children will remain.
When they look back at this period, may they say that after years of litigation and division, their elders finally found the courage to stop. Our greatest legacy will not be proving which one of us was right. It will be ensuring that the next generation does not have to fight the same battle. This opinion is written in the author’s personal capacity as a contribution to dialogue, unity and reconciliation among the Ovambanderu.
ARTICLE 6: HOW DO WE ALL COME HOME?
Perhaps the most important question facing Ovambanderu today can be expressed in five words: How do we all come home? Home, in this context, is not a geographical place. It is the sense that every Omumbanderu belongs to one community irrespective of which leader, royal house or grouping he or she supported during years of disagreement. The recent Supreme Court ruling should encourage us to confront that question seriously. The legal route of establishing parallel traditional authorities for essentially the same community has become increasingly difficult to reconcile with the purpose of the Traditional Authorities Act. Continuing along that road risks repeating the same cycle. There is another road. It begins with accepting that reconciliation does not erase history. Those associated with the recognised Ovambanderu Traditional Authority have their history. Those associated with Aletta Nguvauva, Tjingaete Boas, Katutura Tjiramba and Hoveka have their histories and reasons for the positions they took. All must be heard. But after listening, we must decide whether our differences are greater than our common identity. I write this as a Namibian citizen, a descendant of the Kahuure clan and a brother within the wider Nguvauva family. For me this is not an abstract political discussion. The names involved are connected through community, history and family. That is precisely why reconciliation matters. The responsibility of people connected to historical leadership should not only be to defend claims. Heritage creates obligations. If our ancestors exercised leadership, then their descendants should ask how that inheritance can be used to unite rather than permanently divide their people. Sometimes leadership means standing firm. Sometimes leadership means being the first person willing to cross the road, greet a brother and say: Let us talk. I therefore appeal to every Ovambanderu leader and constituency: come home. Come with your history. Come with your grievances. Come with your dignity. Come without being required to renounce what you believed. But come prepared to accept that the future of Ovambanderu is bigger than any one of us. Let the recognised Traditional Authority open the door. Let those outside it approach the door. Let elders help us cross the threshold. Let churches pray with us.
Let women and young people demand a settlement that protects their future. Let our lawyers help us design lawful institutions rather than prepare the next case. Then let us create one strong Ovambanderu community capable of turning its attention from internal battles towards education, agriculture, business, land, culture and development. There have already been enough case names in our history. Perhaps the next great chapter should not be named after a litigant. Perhaps it should simply be called: The Reunification of the Ovambanderu. The courts can interpret the law. Government can recognise an authority. Neither can make brothers embrace. That decision is ours. Let us sit under one tree again. Let us speak honestly. Let us forgive where we can. Let us reform what must be reformed. And let us ensure that our children never again have to ask which Ovambanderu they belong to. We are Ovambanderu. It is time to come home. This opinion is written in the author’s personal capacity as a contribution to dialogue, unity and reconciliation among the Ovambanderu.
- Kavezemburuka Sieggie Veii Mujoro Namibian citizen | Descendant of the Kahuure clan | Brother within the wider Nguvauva family
