ABSTRACT
Over the past 30 years, the successive SWAPO regimes that governed Namibia always followed a neoliberal policy path. Co-existing with the neoliberal elites are thousands of Namibians living in squalors in a country that has been declared as one of the most unequal nations on the face of the earth. Over the years, social justice activists never gave up the fight for a just and equitable society. They fought for better shelter, housing, economic equality, land, water and sanitation, free tertiary education and income grants to cushion the poor. The successive SWAPO regimes have been indifferent. Interestingly, in response to the Covid-19 pandemic, government ended up implementing the very initiatives it rejected over the years. This text explores several social justice struggles over the years and demonstrates how these were implemented by government as a Covid-19 response in 2020. It thus argues that social justice is possible and the state has demonstrated its capacity in implementing these programmes. It then calls on social justice activists to use the Covid-19 currency to ensure that social justice becomes central in a post-Covid-19 economic order.
Introduction
The advent of the Coronavirus in Namibia witnessed renewed commitment from the government in the fight for social justice. This emerged owing to the battle against Covid-19 that requires access to basic services and needs such as housing, sanitation, potable water, food and other amenities – a status quo that has largely remained neglected and has widened inequality in Namibia. The attainment of Namibia’s independence, on 21st March 1990, sparked hope for restructuring the social and economic divide brought by colonialism. As is the case in much of the colonised Africa, the colonial state was not interested in developing and extending economic benefits to the natives (Rodney Citation1972). As Jauch, Edwards, and Cupido (Citation2009) submits, the German and South African colonial administrations are the root cause of social and economic disempowerment that widened the gap between the rich and the poor in post-independent Namibia. However, since the advent of independence, no significant strides have been achieved in narrowing this gap, as a vast majority of Namibians remain destitute. Literature buttresses this by explaining that poverty and inequality are still rife and characterise the Namibian society today (Lloyd Citation2020; New Era Citation2020). Various policy and legislative interventions have since been put in place to narrow the inequality ratios, but very little success has been recorded, owing to blatant implementation gaps (Sepúlveda Citation2012; New Era Citation2020). Since 1990, these policy and legislative interventions have been focused on poverty alleviation and human development (Republic of Namibia Citation2004, Citation2017). Yet, the rampant governance challenges confronting public administration have greatly undermined attempts at development activities and reducing inequality in Namibia (Ndhlovu and Remmert Citation2018). Indeed, Namibia’s efforts at redressing colonial imbalances and inequality have not met the expectations of its people.
With only 10 years to go until the lapse of the long-term Vision 2030 development plan, the goals associated with propelling the country from a developing lower-middle income to developed higher income status beg careful evaluation considering the current exacerbated social and economic inequality in Namibia. Despite a steady economic growth, Namibia remains one of the most unequal countries in the world, thus signalling that economic benefits do not trickle-down to the poorest communities (Sepúlveda Citation2012; The World Bank Citation2017; Lloyd Citation2020; New Era Citation2020).
In addition to the above, the latest Human Development Report on Namibia indicates that the Human Development Index (HDI) in 2018 stood at 0.645, thus reflecting a medium human development – positioning the country at 130 out of 189 countries (United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) Citation2019). The UNDP (Citation2019) further adds that the period between 1990 and 2018 saw an HDI value increase by 11.3%. Indeed, a languid improvement over a 28-year period for a relatively small population. The Covid-19 pandemic interestingly exposed the limitations of class economic policies. The successes of the various Covid-19 preventative measures put in place by the Namibian government are dependent on the diverse socio-economic settings various communities find themselves in.
However, in a twist of events and renewed commitment to cater for the less privileged and economically vulnerable Namibians, the government put in place a safety net, an economic stimulus package (ESP) to cushion the social and economic consequences of Covid-19 (Shiimi Citation2020). The private sector and various state-owned enterprises have similarly been active in aiding government in this regard. To an unfamiliar observer, the spectacle of the sudden care of the poor and social interventions by the state and public sector might suggest that Namibia is a caring welfare state. When observed closely, particularly by analysing the history of social justice struggles in post-colonial Namibia, it becomes clear that this occurrence is new for successive South West Africa People’s Organisation (SWAPO) regimes that stood opposed and rejected efforts to introduce socio-economic policies to bring about social justice.
This paper analyses a situation in which the fight for social justice in Namibia was meaningfully advanced by Covid-19 in unprecedented ways. At the time the ESP was announced, Namibia only had 16 cases and no Covid-19 death. In sharp contrast, by July 2019, Namibia had 113 cases of the Hepatitis E virus, with 45 people having lost their lives (Jantze Citation2019). There was, however, no centralised meaningful response from the state as the case with Covid-19. By making use of a mixed research method that relies more on qualitative than quantitative secondary data, as well as a single case study exploration research design, the text explores the struggles for social justice in post-colonial Namibia and how the state rejected most of these interventions just for the same initiatives to surface as Covid-19 response. It then provides some thoughts on the future of social justice in Namibia, in the post-Covid-19 era. Essentially, the text is anti-neoliberal critique and aligns with studies that argue and submit that an interventionist state is possible.
From socialism to capitalism – SWAPO’s change in policy positions
Former liberation movement SWAPO, Namibia’s ruling party since independence, had aligned and identified with socialist countries before independence (Vigne Citation1987; Leys and Saul Citation1994). SWAPOs operational sustenance and drive towards independence promised equitable access to resources for all Namibians (SWAPO Citation1981). This was opportune for SWAPO as the German and South African colonial and minority regimes deprived the majority of the population economic spoils and opportunities. In anticipation of this transformation and transition into independence, SWAPO committed to a socialist government in post-colonial Namibia. The then liberation movement confirmed that:
… at its Central Committee meeting in August 1976, SWAPO adopted a Political Programme which commits the party to a socialist transformation of Namibian society … SWAPO is committed to uniting all Namibian people, particularly the working class, the peasantry and progressive intellectuals, into a vanguard party capable of safeguarding national independence and of building a classless, non-exploitative society based on the ideals and principles of scientific socialism. (SWAPO Citation1981, 285 and 294)
This demonstrates that, upon attaining ruling party status after the 1989 elections, SWAPO abandoned the principles of socialism in order to attract foreign investors to aid with the development of Namibia, and to garner the support of Western countries for Namibia’s independence (Jauch, Edwards, and Cupido Citation2009; Schmidt Citation2009).
Not only has SWAPO changed its socialist stance to embrace the capitalist order, it resisted and rejected most advocates and advocacy for social justice. The result from this capitalist/neoliberal order, is that Namibia remained one of the most unequal countries in the world with the devastating impact on the poor as is characteristic of any capitalist society (Navarro Citation2007; Jauch, Edwards, and Cupido Citation2009; Schmidt Citation2009; World Bank Citation2019; Lloyd Citation2020). The section below explores the social justice struggles in post-colonial Namibia.
The struggles for social justice
With SWAPO no longer the champion of socio-economic agenda for the poor – an agenda that a socialist state would pursue – it meant that fight for social justice in Namibia would need new champions if SWAPO, as a liberation movement, could be considered as a former champion of this cause. The Namibian Constitution, adopted in 1990, assists the struggle for social justice to a minor extent – it entrenches right to free basic education and right to culture. The rest of socio-economic rights – such as housing/shelter, environment, minimum wage, health – are grouped in article 95, which cannot be enforced as the case with rights contained in the entrenched Bill of Rights (Republic of Namibia Citation1990; Hancox and Mukonda Citation2012). The fight for social justice in post-colonial Namibia thus took place outside the state. The labour movement that was closer to SWAPO in the struggle years was de-mobilised and co-opted in SWAPO machineries, participating in internal SWAPO politics and its leaders rewarded with government positions (Jauch Citation2014). Beyond SWAPO capitulation, the limitations of the neoliberal constitution and the demobilisation and co-option of labour, Hancox and Mukonda (Citation2012, 160) summarises the challenges that faced the fight for social justice in Namibia arguing that:
… the problem lies with policy cohesion, lack of capacity, insufficient political will and ineffective implementation. In a country with a relatively small population of just over two million and sufficient natural resources, it should be possible to adequately meet the basic needs of a far greater proportion of the Namibian population.
The basic income grant
A 2003 review of Namibia’s tax system, by government’s own Namibia Tax Commission, found high rates of inequality and poverty and recommended a universal income grant as a remedial measure. The commission suggested an amount of N$100 per month as a BIG for all Namibians up to the age of 60 (Jauch, Edwards, and Cupido Citation2009). Estimated as only costing about 3% of the country’s GDP, it was proposed that the BIG could be funded through adjustments to the national tax system. However, it emerged that no political consensus could be reached on the viability of the BIG; hence no real commitment came from the government in making it work for redressing the rampant inequality in Namibia. Jauch, Edwards, and Cupido (Citation2009, 52) summarise the BIG divisions as follows:
… a coalition of churches, trade unions, NGOs and AIDS service organisations formed the Basic Income Grant Coalition with a view to advocate for the introduction of a BIG in Namibia. After 2 years of debating and lobbying, no breakthrough was achieved. Government ministers and parliamentarians were still divided over the merits of a BIG and the Coalition thus decided to implement a basic income grant in one particular village. This was meant to demonstrate the impact of a BIG in practice.
The introduction of the BIG dropped household poverty significantly. Using the food poverty line, 76% of residents fell below this line in November 2007. This was reduced to 37% within one year of the BIG. Amongst households that were not affected by in-migration, only 16% fell below this poverty line. This shows the dramatic impact of a national BIG on food poverty levels in Namibia.
During the 2012/2013 summer months, … modelled on the Basic Income Grant Pilot in Otjivero, the three Lutheran Churches in Namibia implemented a joint emergency cash grant programme. The cash grant was universally paid in four communities in four regions reaching 6,000 people … the impact of the cash grant was very visible and provided a crucial lifeline for the communities. It has carried people through a very difficult period of time. Many people related that they would have died of hunger and despair without the grant.
The living and minimum wage
Challenges associated with the living and minimum wage in Namibia emanate from the colonial era. As a result, the new independent government undertook to reform Namibia’s labour relations system. The passing of the Labour Act (Act No. 6 of 1992) saw a bias for collection bargaining through tripartite consultations between government, trade unions and employers (private sector) to improve the living and working conditions, including pay (Jauch, Edwards, and Cupido Citation2009). The Labour Act (Act No. 11 of 2007) similarly failed to prescribe minimum wages, but nonetheless paved the way for assessments to be done to recommend minimum wages. Improving the working conditions for Namibians has been particularly important for the government, especially viewed against the historical colonial imbalances of income and as promised in SWAPO’s Citation1989 election manifesto. Specific focus has been for those employees at the lower end of income distribution that minimum wage laws would benefit most. However, this expectation was not met as no significant improvements were recorded in living and minimum wages, hence negatively impacted on living and working conditions for the poor working class (Jauch Citation2007). Illustrating the inequality problem in Namibia since independence, a study depicting income distribution inequality indices on the national consumption share in 1993, Van Rooy et al. (Citation2006, 14) found that:
… the bottom 20% (or quartile) of households receive only 1.85% of total expenditure per capita, whereas the top 20% is receiving 74.79% of total expenditure. Similarly, the poorest 20% of the population receives 2.45% of total expenditure, while the top 20% 70.95 percent.
Countries (like Namibia) with higher GDP levels have greater public policy flexibility to engage in redistributive justice; if its Gini is also high (like Namibia) then its most likely that its people are not deriving a reasonable share of national wealth. The GDP value shows that the national capacity exists; the Gini value shows that public policy is either failing or willfully inequitable.
Free education
At independence, government committed to reform the education sector given that the apartheid educational designs remained. The intention has been to establish a unified education administrative structure that ensures equitable access to education for all Namibians (Amukugo Citation2017). It is for this reason that Article 20 (2) of the Namibian Constitution provides that primary education shall be free and compulsory at the cost of the state (Republic of Namibia Citation1990). In Section 38 (1), the Education Act (Act No. 16 of 2001) furthers and goes beyond this constitutional provision by including secondary education as follows:
All tuition for pre-primary, primary, secondary and special education in State schools, including - (a) all school books; (b) all educational materials; (c) all related teaching and learning materials; and (d) examination fees for full time learners, are provided free of charge to learners until they complete secondary education. (Republic of Namibia Citation2001, 25)
The fight for housing
The deliberate colonial discrimination on the provision of goods and services and general development between rural and urban areas created significant urban housing challenges in independent Namibia. In search of opportunities, many people flocked from rural to urban areas. This created a very high demand for urban housing (Schmidt Citation2009). This is the context in which the Namibian government identified housing a major priority requiring state intervention through its National Housing Policy launched soon after independence, in 1991. Concern has been for low to middle income groups that cannot qualify for land and credit facilities to acquire housing (Jauch, Edwards, and Cupido Citation2009; Schmidt Citation2009). Notwithstanding government’s recognition of this housing problem, Namibia has 25 years after independence, been ranked as a country with the highest property inflation rates in the world (Shinovene Citation2015). Owing to urbanisation and population growth, the National Housing Policy of 1991 was not effective to cater for the increased demand for housing and was thus reviewed in 2009. At this point, the reviewed policy found that 70% of Namibians could not access urban land due to low incomes and poverty that excludes them from home loan facilities (Gabone Citation2017). In 2011, Smit (Citation2011b) found that the:
… housing backlog is estimated to be over 80,000 houses. The majority of this housing backlog is in the country's lowest income segment, those earning less than N$1 501 per month, where the backlog is 45,000 houses. This is closely followed by the category for those earning between N$1 501 and N$4600 a month, where the backlog is 30,000 houses.
Water and sanitation
The Water Supply and Sanitation Policy of 1993, reviewed in 2008, identifies the need for potable water and sanitation as a priority to redress the colonial imbalances that deprived a majority of those in rural areas access to potable water and sanitation (Italtrend Citation2009). Access to water supply and sanitation later became a major problem in urban areas where the proliferation of informal settlements increased beyond expectations due to high rates of urbanisation (Remmert Citation2016). While a majority of these people flocking to towns and cities in search of opportunities end up living in informal settlements, the rate at which local authorities provide water and sanitation in these areas is far below the demand. With only 10 years left to Namibia’s long-term developmental vision, Vision 2030, that aims to achieve equitable access to potable water and freshwater resources by all, it is doubtful if these targets will be attained (Republic of Namibia Citation2004). Remmert (Citation2016, 2) accounts for this development as follows:
Namibia’s water and sanitation sector development since independence can be captured, broadly under three themes: - The establishment of increasingly complex and ambitious policies, laws, plans and regulations many of which remain fragmented, incomplete, unenforced and unimplemented; - The loss of technical expertise and capacity from public institutions to the private sector or retirement; and - The overall lack of public investment in tangible capital projects coupled with a growing maintenance backlog on the existing, increasingly inadequate infrastructure.
Enters covid-19
Declaration of the State of Emergency and Announcement of a lockdown
The 2019 outbreak of Covid-19 in China subsequently saw the World Health Organisation (WHO) declare it a Public Health Emergency of International Concern in 2020. The virus spread worldwide and by December 2020, more than 74 million cases have been confirmed worldwide with more than 1.6 million fatalities (World Health Organisation Citation2020). Namibia is one of the affected countries that reported its first two confirmed cases of the virus on 13th March 2020. By December 2020, the number of confirmed cases was more than 18 000 with more than 170 deaths (Shangula Citation2020a). Five days after the first confirmed cases, President Hage Geingob declared a State of Emergency (SOE) on 17th March 2020 in the country. 10 days later, this was followed by a lockdown of two regions; Khomas Region (including the nearby towns of Rehoboth and Okahandja) and Erongo region for 21 days until 17th April 2020 (Shangula Citation2020b). The two regions, as ports of international entry, were seen as exposed to international travellers. The initial cases also came from these towns. As a result of the lockdown, travelling to and from these regions was therefore prohibited for the duration of lockdown. All workers, both public and private, were to remain at home. Parliamentary sessions were suspended. Markets and bars were prohibited (Shikongo Citation2020). Public gatherings and gatherings of more than 10 people were also prohibited. Few days before the lapse of the 21 days of the lockdown, on 14th April 2020, the lockdown was further extended until 5th May 2020, this time applicable to the entire country with the same conditions. Up until 4th May 2020, only critical and essential workers/services were permitted as per the lists published in the government gazette.
Following complaints and challenges faced by ordinary citizens, again informed by the realities of poverty and inequality, government was forced to relax the lockdown regulations and relax some provisions to allow for informal markets and trading to resume (Miyanicwe Citation2020; Ngutjinazo Citation2020; Menges Citation2020; Republic of Namibia Citation2020a). However, the exponential increase of Covid-19 infections and cases in the Erongo Region, particularly the town of Walvis Bay led President Geingob to revert it to stage 1 for the period 8–22 June 2020 and similarly extended this to entire region (Geingob Citation2020). At this point, the rest of Namibia was in stage 3 and transitioned into stage 4 on 29 June 2020 with the exception of the Erongo region that migrated to stage 3 for the period 22 June 2020–6 July 2020 (Geingob Citation2020). The State of Emergency and the lockdowns eventually ended in September 2020.
Economic stimulus package (ESP)
To mitigate the effects of Covid-19 on Namibia’s economy, the government put in place a stimulus package. This ESP was launched on 1st April 2020 with the intention of keeping the economy afloat and cushioning the unprecedented hardships presented by the Covid-19 in general and the lockdown in particular (Shiimi Citation2020). In collaboration with stakeholders such as the private sector, development partners and other non-state actors, the first phase of the ESP was adopted with the intention of redressing the negative effects arising from the lockdown period (Ngatjiheue Citation2020; Shiimi Citation2020). Although the lockdown period was extended, the finance ministry did not make further budgetary allocation to the ESP to cater for the extension. In total, the ESP amounts to N$ 8.1 billion earmarked for the following:
N$5.9 billion as direct support to businesses, households and cash flow acceleration payments for services rendered to Government and N$2.3 billion of additional support, guaranteed by Government, but off-balance sheet Government liabilities to further support loan uptake on preferential terms by business and individuals … the Package is directed at: formal and informal businesses in sectors which are directly or indirectly affected by the lockdown measures and other external and internal demand and supply side shocks; and labour and households, both to ensure households and the related labour market aspects such as job retention and to mitigate the negative impact on income and to provide for the basic amenities for households such as potable water. This would promote health and hygiene as well as enable Namibians to cope with the constrained conditions arising from the lockdowns as we stave off the potential spread of the COVID-19. (Shiimi Citation2020, 2)
Emergency Income Grant
As part of the ESP, provision was made for an Emergency Income Grant (EIG) to aid households who experienced reduced or no income, job losses, health expenses and other challenges due to the Covid-19. The EIG comprises a N$750 once off payment available to those who are unemployed, between the age of 18 and 60 years and not receiving any other social grants (Deloitte Citation2020a). The Finance Ministry committed to make EIG payments no later than 7 days from the day of application. Processing of these payments are done in collaboration with the Social Security Commission (SSC) and other financial sector and information communication technology stakeholders through existing automated tele-machines of the banking institutions in Namibia (Ngatjiheue Citation2020). The N$750 was based on the national poverty line that warrants a N$250 per person per week. However, at the time of announcing the EIG, Namibia was under a 21 d lockdown, and government remained mum on whether an additional N$500 would be made available for the 16 days lockdown extension. The EIG was allocated a total of N$562 million in the ESP (Shiimi Citation2020). The first payments started after 14th April 2020 (Ngutjinazo Citation2020). By 16th April 2020, the Finance Ministry announced that an amount of N$110 million has been dispatched to 146,974 applicants. By 22nd of April 2020, 5,79,000 applications were received of which only 2,34,300 applications were approved for a total amount of N$176 million (Brandt Citation2020; Oliveira Citation2020). Unfortunately, it was also reported that 1,48,000 applicants were rejected (Brandt Citation2020; Oliveira Citation2020). On 6th May 2020, an additional 9,70,720 applications were received for the EIG by the close-off date of 30 April 2020, with 5,76,104 being approved to the tune of just over N$432 million, with 3,94,616 rejected (Beukes Citation2020). This brings the total beneficiaries of the EIG to 9,57,378 Namibians. The applicants were required to use their cellphones to apply and submit their identity numbers. The EIG was marred by a lot of challenges, distrust, and unhappiness resulting in the Finance ministry resolving to decentralise applicant verifications to constituency councillors in the 14 regions (Brandt Citation2020; Oliveira Citation2020). These sentiments of ordinary Namibians as documented by Oliveira and Mbathera (Citation2020), journalists of Namibia’s largest newspaper, The Namibian, are telling and are reproduced for fitting comprehension.
Desiree Kahenge, a 31-year-old entrepreneur selling perishable goods at Tsumeb:
We fear that the income grant will not reach us … we fear certain promises never reach the people they are supposed to benefit.
I don't know what they will do with my ID number. Maybe they will say we voted for Itula and they will block everything I will do in future. Why can't we register through our association like we have always done with everything else?
I applied but I did not get any response. I don't believe the system can handle all our applications. The time given is also too short.
Social Security Commission – Economic Stimulus Package
The Ministry of Finance in conjunction with the SSC, launched the SCC ESP that encompasses a National Employment and Salary Protection Scheme (NESPS) aimed at safeguarding jobs and employee incomes for hard hit industries (Kahiurika Citation2020). Valued at N$320 million, the Commission explained that the:
The National Employment and Salary Protection Scheme for COVID19 is an employment scheme designed in terms of section 37 of the Social Security Act No 34 of 1994. The scheme aims to combine the efforts of the Government of the Republic of Namibia (through the Ministry of Finance and the Social Security Commission (SSC)) firstly, to dissuade employers from retrenching employees in the short term and secondly to provide support for individuals who have suffered a loss of income as a result of the COVID-19 shock. (Social Security Commission Citation2020, 1)
Access to water
The prevention of Covid-19 is reliant on practicing hygiene, which requires water. The ESP made provision for subsidising water supply during the lockdown period. The declaration of the SOE by the president saw the Minister of Urban and Rural Development give a directive to all local authorities for the reconnection of water to households that were closed due to non-payment (Republic of Namibia Citation2020b). Furthermore, all communal and water sources in urban informal settlements were now accessible without key cards or tokens. This water supply intervention is expected to cost government about N$10 million (Shiimi Citation2020). As a necessary intervention, the poorest people in the communal areas and informal settlements were the biggest beneficiaries as access to potable water has been a serious challenge since independence. Recordings, widely seen and distributed on social media, of an elderly man from the improvised Otjomuise informal settlement of Windhoek shouting ‘free water, free food, viva Hage Geingob’ demonstrated how much this means to ordinary Namibians who waited for 30 years for such kindness. Local authorities took further initiative as seen with the Windhoek Municipality that allocated N$8.9 million towards mitigating the risks posed by Covid-19 on service delivery. The City also donated N$ 3,00,000 from the Mayoral Relief Fund to the central Covid-19 response efforts. By 31 March 2020, the City of Windhoek was reported to have reconnected water to 1200 households which were closed due to nonpayment, with more expected to be reconnected by then (Nel Citation2020). Furthermore, Nel (Citation2020) reports that 18 water tanks had been put up in informal settlements in Windhoek to provide free water to community members there. A two days refill schedule of these tanks has been put in place. The SSC donated N$3.3 million meant to erect water tanks in several constituencies in Windhoek, primarily those of low and ultra-low income communities. A further N$5,00,000 has been donated to the Erongo region for the same cause. Namibia’s telecommunications giant, and state owned enterprise, Mobile Telecommunications (MTC) joined the bandwagon of donations and availed N$1,00,000 for water provision (Nel Citation2020), while Namibia’s power utility company, NamPower, donated 90 water tanks to informal settlements (Rasmeni Citation2020). All of a sudden, water agony for most Namibian was no longer a problem, albeit temporarily.
Provision of toilets, housing and food initiatives
Several public and private entities entered the philanthropic bandwagon of donating and aiding the poor. NamPower donated 150 toilets and sanitisers to informal settlements in Windhoek, Okahandja and Erongo Region (Rasmeni Citation2020). It’s Managing Director, Kahenge Haulofu, cognisant of the existence of the vulnerable and poor in Namibia, sympathised:
Although everybody is affected in one way or another, those who might feel the hardest pinch are the most vulnerable and poor among the communities who do not have the necessary means or access to essential basics prevent and fight the pandemic. (Rasmeni Citation2020)
MTC further pledged N$1 million to provide impoverished communities with soap, sanitisers and food parcels during the lockdown period. Namib Mills, the largest grain processing company in Namibia, donated 2.9 and 1.3 tons of maize meal and pasta to the value of N$75,000 to ensure food supply and boost the immune of affected communities (Namibian Broadcasting Corporation Citation2020).
NSFAF Laptops for students
The Covid-19 pandemic in Namibia resulted in institutions of higher learning suspending face-to-face contact sessions at their own volition, earlier on, as required by Lockdown regulations. As a result, various institutions have transitioned to online teaching and learning. In this context, digital platforms of learning have become essential in facilitating teaching and during the Covid-19 lockdown period. For students, access to computers is thus vital for accessing online learning platforms to ensure uninterrupted learning (Nakale Citation2020). However, this has brought with it several challenges as not all students have access to laptops and computers, thus hampering their access to e-learning material. As a Covid-19 response intervention, the Namibia Students Financial Assistance Fund (NSFAF) announced that it would release a total of N$282 million to students, capped at N$10,000 per student, for students to acquire laptops and other tools required for e-learning (Kandovazu Citation2020).
Conclusion – it is possible: thanks to covid-19
One of the arguments that are always made by government officials in rejection of proposals of expanded social welfare programmes is that they are expensive. The state, in its neoliberal pursuit, constantly argue that the economy will be built by the private sector and its core task is limited provide an enabling environment (Amupanda Citation2017). It has been argued herein and elsewhere that this path, for 30 years, has not yielded notable fruits – Namibia remains one of the most unequal nations on the face of the earth.
With few cases and zero death at the time, compared to Hepatitis E virus that is still active today, Covid-19 brought to the fore what the state has always denied and not allowed – its interventionist character. Seemingly concerned about the state’s Covid-19 overdrive, the former Health Minister and the former Covid-19 response team focal person, Dr. Bernard Haufiku, bemoaned the fact that the state seems to only concentrate on Covid-19 forgetting about Hepatitis E (Ikela Citation2020). It became evident that the state can, indeed, intervene to assist the poor in meaningful ways.
Despite more than 15 years of rejection of the introduction of the BIG, the state abandoned implementing an income grant. To be simplistic and if semantics mattered, the only difference between the BIG and the EIG are the words ‘basic’ and ‘emergency’. The rationale and method – to aid the poor and destitute through cash provisions – is exactly the same. Social justice activists had always argued then, as they do now, that the condition of the poor living in impoverished communities has always been an emergency. If an emergent situation justifies an income grant then they require such grant with or without Covid-19. As stated earlier, President Hage Geingob declared the situation in informal settlements, where nearly 1 million Namibians reside, as a humanitarian crisis in 2019. It is those in humanitarian crises that need assistance – with or without Covid-19. The BIG was proposing a grant of only N$100.00 per month while the EIG provided N$750 once off which translates close to N$600 million. Assuming that a revised BIG lists 5,00,000 beneficiaries, an amount paid as once off EIG can provide these beneficiaries with a N$100 BIG for the duration of one year. Covid-19 has not only proven that state can intervene on the side of the poor, it has also proven that the state can implement a BIG.
While the fight for better protection of labour in general and for universal minimum and living wage in particular has not enjoyed support of the state over the past 30 years, the initiatives by the state, including the N$320 million National Employment and Salary Protection Scheme by the SSC have demonstrated that a dialogue for better working conditions, bordered on state interventionism beyond existing parameters, is possible for the better protection of the workers. Covid-19 response provides a fertile ground for mobilisation for the fight for universal living and minimum wage in a post-Covid-19 era. Government officials had always argued that it is not possible to provide free tertiary education. The provision of N$282 million in non-tuition support to tertiary education students to buy learning equipment provides renewed impetus to the fight for free tertiary education. The N$10 million subsidy to local authorities to reconnect households whose water was disconnected is not only a welcome relief to the poor but a sad display that the state is aware that thousands of Namibians are without water due to non-payment. A basic need such as water should not be one that is made available to the poor only on account of a pandemic. That several public entities with muscular financial power, such as MTC, SSC and NamPower amongst others, moved quickly – with their executives making compassionate speeches – to shelter the homeless, providing them with food and assisting government and local authorities with the provision of water and sanitation makes one wonder – what if this is not a once-off intervention and is made a permanent component of their social responsibility? Wouldn’t this go a long way in responding to the 30 years cry for adequate shelter, water and sanitation amongst others? Indeed, Covid-19 has demonstrated that social justice cause in Namibia is noble and the state is capable of responding and intervening to thwart inequality and save the poor who are sinking in the neoliberal economic quagmire.
It took Covid-19 for state officials to come to their senses and implicitly accept most arguments of and by social justice activists over the years. It is not only the acceptance of the proposals but also the actual implementation of the same. It can now be argued, that two income grants have been implemented in post-colonial Namibia; the BIG in 2009 and the EIG in 2020. Reference will be made, for mobilisation purposes, that the state and public entities demonstrated that the poor, homeless and the economically destitute and dejected masses can be assisted in meeting their basic needs such as shelter, water and sanitation. Indeed, the state has demonstrated that workers and students can be assisted with expanded job security initiatives and in acquiring learning material. Understandably, the state will not accord the Covid-19 state interventionist order with permanent status. It is, therefore, incumbent upon social justice activists to use this opportunity to reorganise and remobilise using the Covid-19 currency to ensure that social justice become central in government’s post-Covid-19 economic policy and orientation.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).
References
- Amukugo, Elizabeth Magano. 2017. “Democracy, Education and Social Justice: Theoretical Perspectives.” In Democracy and Education in Namibia and Beyond: A Critical Apprasial, edited by Elizabeth Magano Amukugo, 8–23. Windhoek: UNAM Press.
- Amupanda, Job Shipululo. 2017. “Constitutionalism and Principles of Economic Order. Examining Namibia’s ‘Mixed Economy’ and the Economic Asylum of Neoliberalism.” Journal of Namibian Studies 21: 7–26.
- Asante, Samuel K, and Wilfred W Asombang. 1989. “An Independent Namibia? The Future Facing SWAPO.” Third World Quarterly 11 (3): 1–19.
- Ashipala, Nuusita. 2019. Nearly 1 Million Namibians Live in Informal Settlements. August 20. Accessed May 7, 2020. https://neweralive.na/posts/nearly-1-million-namibians-live-in-informal-settlements.
- Basic Income Grant Coalition. 2009. Making the Difference! The BIG in Namibia. Windhoek: Basic Income Grant Coalition.
- Bayer, Roxane, and Terttu Newaka. 2020. “Coronavirus Briefs: MTC Shelters Homeless During Lockdown.” The Namibian, April 15: 5. Accessed April 27, 2020. https://www.namibian.com.na/90238/read/Coronavirus-Briefs-MTC-shelters-homeless-during-lockdown.
- Beukes, Jemima. 2020. “394 000 Emergency Grant Applicants Rejected.” Namibian Sun, May 6. Accessed May 7, 2020. https://www.namibiansun.com/news/394-000-emergency-grant-applicants-rejected2020-05-05.
- Boer, Martin. 2005. “Taking a Stand: Comparing Namibia’s Political Party Platforms.” In Spot the Difference: Namibia’s Political Parties Compared, edited by Justine Hunter, 9–60. Windhoek: Namibia Institute for Democracy.
- Brandt, Edgar. 2020. 148,000 Grant Applications Rejected. April 22. https://neweralive.na/posts/148-000-grant-applications-rejected.
- Deloitte. 2020a. COVID-19 Pandemic: Announcement of Economic Stimulus and Relief Package by the Minister of Finance. Windhoek: Deloitte.
- Deloitte. 2020b. COVID-19 Pandemic: SSC Economic Stimulus Package Announced. Windhoek: Deloitte.
- Economic and Social Justice Trust. 2019. Basic Income Grant, Otjivero, Namibia - 10 Years Later. Windhoek: Economic and Social Justice Trust.
- Erastus, Nghinomenwa. 2019. “Job Losses Continue as Economy Struggles.” The Namibian, August 14: 1. Accessed April 28, 2020. https://www.namibian.com.na/191910/archive-read/Job-losses-continue-as-economy-struggles.
- Gabone, Daria Dorose. 2017. An Assessment Study on the Provision of Affordable Housing in Namibia: A Case Study of Windhoek. Windhoek: University of Namibia.
- Geingob, Hage. 2020. “Statement by His Excellency Dr Hage Geingob at a Media Briefing on the National Migration from Stage 4 to Stage 4 & Erongo Region Specific Response.” Republic of Namibia: Office of the President. June 22. Accessed July 6, 2020. http://www.op.gov.na/documents/84084/1079375/Statement+of+HE+President+Geingob+-+Covid+Update+-+22+June+2020+2+FINAL.pdf/01017f13-b708-43dc-8f37-47df47570aac.
- Haidula, Tuyeimo. 2016. Sanitation Remains a Challenge. February 4. Accessed May 7, 2020. https://www.namibian.com.na/index.php?page=archive-read&id=147003.
- Haidula, Tuyeimo. 2019. Over 200 Schools have no Toilets. February 13. Accessed May 7, 2020. https://www.namibian.com.na/185607/archive-read/Over-200-schools-have-no-toilets.
- Haidula, Tuyeimo, and Sonja Smith. 2020. Two Toilets for 900 Pupils. February 12. Accessed May 7, 2020. https://www.namibian.com.na/197908/archive-read/Two-toilets-for-900-pupils.
- Hancox, Tony, and Ricardo Mukonda. 2012. “Human Dignity and Democracy.” In Unfinished Business: Democracy in Namibia, edited by B. M. Sims and Monica Koep, 130–164. Pretoria: IDASA.
- Iikela, Sakeus. 2018. “Over 60 000 Jobs Lost in 2016/17.” The Namibian, March 20: 1. Accessed April 28, 2020. https://www.namibian.com.na/175624/archive-read/Over-60-000-jobs-lost-in-201617.
- Ikela, Selma. 2020. Haufiku: ‘All Eyes on Covid-19, Ignoring Hepatitis E’. March 31. Accessed May 7, 2020. https://neweralive.na/posts/haufiku-all-eyes-on-covid-19-ignoring-hepatitis-e.
- Italtrend. 2009. “Namibia Sanitation Situational Analysis Report.” Windhoek: Italtrend.
- Jantze, Zorena. 2019. Hepatitis E Slum Epidemic Nowhere Near over. July 1. Accessed May 7, 2020. https://informante.web.na/hepatitis-e-slum-epidemic-nowhere-near-over/.
- Jauch, Herbert. 2007. “Between Politics and the Shopfloor: Which way for Namibia's Labour Movement?.” In Transitions in Namibia. Which Changes for Whom?, edited by Henning Melber, 1–16. Uppsala: Nordic Africa Institute.
- Jauch, Herbert. 2014. “Namibia's Labour Movement After 25 Years of Independence.” In Working for Social Democracy in Namibia, edited by Friedrich Ebert-Stiftung, 43–75. Windhoek: Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung.
- Jauch, Herbert, Lucy Edwards, and Braam Cupido. 2009. A Rich Country with Poor People: Inequality in Namibia. Windhoek: Labour Resource and Research Institute.
- Jauch, Herbert, and Ellison Tjirera. 2017. “The Need for a Developmental State Intervention in Namibia.” In Towards a Developmental State in Southern Africa, edited by Godfrey Kanyenze, Herbert Jauch, Alice Kanengoni, Masego Madzwamuse, and Deprose Muchena, 135–199. Harare: Weaver Press.
- Kahiurika, Ndanki. 2020. SSC Stimulus Package for Labour Sector. April 22. https://www.namibian.com.na/90465/read/SSC-stimulus-package-for-labour-sector.
- Kandjamba, Tango Olwenongo. 2018. Investigating Financing and Affordability of Higher Education at University of Namibia. Windhoek: University of Namibia.
- Kandovazu, Eba. 2020. “NSFAF to pay 10k per Student to Tackle E-learning.” Informante, April 8. Accessed April 28, 2020. https://informante.web.na/nsfaf-to-pay-10k-per-student-to-tackle-e-learning/.
- LaRRI. 2000. Export Processing Zones in Namibia: Taking a Closer Look. Windhoek: LaRRI.
- Lennon, Jade. 2018. How Namibia’s Housing Shortage Became a Humanitarian Crisis. July 8. Accessed April 27, 2020. https://medium.com/@Jade_Lennon/how-namibias-housing-shortage-became-a-humanitarian-crisis-eef05ba14b9b.
- Leys, Colin, and John S. Saul. 1994. “Liberation Without Democracy? The Swapo Crisis of 1976.” Journal of Southern African Studies 20 (1): 123–147.
- Lloyd, Allison. 2020. Inequality and Poverty in Namibia. August 12. Accessed December 20, 2020. https://borgenproject.org/inequality-and-poverty-in-namibia-2/.
- Lombardt, Ivin, and John Nakuta. 2014. “Assessing the Role of Civil Society Organizations in Namibia.” In Working for Social Democracy in Namibia, edited by Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung, 101–115. Windhoek: Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung.
- Mamdani, P., and M. Page. 2009. Should Higher Education be Free? Accessed April 27, 2020. http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2009/aug/13/should.
- Masawi, Tiri. 2019. “ILO Lauds Namibia’s Efforts in Creating a Minimum Wage.” The Southern Times, October 25. Accessed April 27, 2020. https://southerntimesafrica.com/site/news/ilo-lauds-namibias-efforts-in-creating-a-minimum-wage.
- Melber, Henning. 2007. “SWAPO Is the Nation, and the Nation Is SWAPO: Government and Opposition in a Dominant Party State, The Case of Namibia.” In Political Opposition in Africa Countries: The Cases of Kenya, Namibia, Zambia and Zimbabwe, edited by Henning Melber, 61–83. Uppsala: Nordiska Afrikainstitutet.
- Melber, Henning. 2010. Namibia: Social Justice and Solidarity – Think ‘BIG’. June 10. Accessed May 7, 2020. https://www.pambazuka.org/activism/namibia-social-justice-and-solidarity-–-think-big.
- Menges, Werner. 2020. “Covid-19 ‘Fake News’ now a Crime.” The Namibian, April 18. Accessed April 28, 2020. https://www.namibian.com.na/90373/read/Covid-19-fake-news-now-a-crime.
- Miyanicwe, Clemans. 2020. “Bars Closed in Kunene and Otjozondjupa Regions.” The Namibian, March 28. Accessed April 28, 2020. https://www.namibian.com.na/89748/read/Bars-closed-in-Kunene-and-Otjozondjupa-regions.
- Nakale, Albertina. 2019. Discarding Shacks no Election Ploy: Geingob. January 30. Accessed May 7, 2020. https://neweralive.na/posts/discarding-shacks-no-election-ploy-geingob.
- Nakale, Albertina. 2020. “NSFAF to Pay Out N$10 000 to over 22 000 Students.” New Era, April 14. Accessed April 28, 2020. https://neweralive.na/posts/nsfaf-to-pay-out-n10-000-to-over-22-000-students.
- Nakatana, Festus. 2020. Geingob Drops Cabinet Surprises. March 23. Accessed May 7, 2020. https://neweralive.na/posts/geingob-drops-cabinet-surprises.
- Namibian Broadcasting Corporation. 2020. “Businesses Answer Call for COVID-19 Response Assistance.” Namibian Boradcasting Corporation. Accessed April 27, 2020. https://www.nbc.na/news/businesses-answer-call-covid-19-response-assistance.29690.
- Namibian Sun. 2020. “MTC Houses the Homeless.” Namibian Sun, April 14. Accessed April 14, 2020. https://www.namibiansun.com/news/mtc-houses-the-homeless2020-04-13.
- Navarro, Vicente. 2007. “Neoliberalism as a Class Ideology; Or, the Political Causes of the Growth of Inequalities.” International Journal of Health Services 37 (1): 47–62.
- Ndhlovu, Pauline, and Dietrich Remmert. 2018. Housing in Namibia: Rights, Challenges and Opportunities. Windhoek: Institute for Public Policy Research.
- Nel, Yolanda. 2020. “CoW Approves N$8.9 Million for Covid-19.” Windhoek Express, March 31. Accessed April 27, 2020. https://www.we.com.na/news/cow-approves-n89-million-for-covid-192020-03-31.
- New Era. 2018. “Minimum Wage for Domestic Workers up by 4.15%.” New Era, November 2. Accessed April 27, 2020. https://neweralive.na/posts/minimum-wage-for-domestic-workers-up-by-415.
- New Era. 2020. “Poverty and Inequality in Namibia.” New Era, September 18. Accessed December 20, 2020. https://neweralive.na/posts/letter-poverty-and-inequality-in-namibia.
- Ngatjiheue, Charmaine. 2020. “Govt Rolls Out N$8,1b Covid-19 Stimulus.” The Namibian, April 2: 1. Accessed April 27, 2020. https://www.namibian.com.na/89867/read/Govt-rolls-out-N$81b-Covid-19-stimulus.
- Ngutjinazo, Okeri. 2020. “Informal Sector Gets Lifeline.” The Namibian, April 15: 1. Accessed April 27, 2020. https://www.namibian.com.na/90233/read/Informal-sector-gets-lifeline.
- Ngutjinazo, Okeri, and Ndanki Kahuirika. 2019. Shacks ‘offend’ Geingob … Wants them Gone in 5 Years. January 30. Accessed May 7, 2020. https://www.namibian.com.na/185139/archive-read/Shacks-offend-Geingob-wants-them-gone-in-5-years.
- Nunuhe, Magreth. 2019. Still counting the cost of ‘free education’. February 04. Accessed May 7, 2020. https://southerntimesafrica.com/site/news/still-counting-the-cost-of-free-education.
- Oliveira, Yokany. 2020a. First Batch of Grant Beneficiaries Paid. April 16. Accessed May 7, 2020. https://www.namibian.com.na/90270/read/First-batch-of-grant-beneficiaries-paid.
- Oliveira, Yokany, and Ester Mbathera. 2020b. Concerns over Emergency Income Grant. April 14. Accessed May 7, 2020. https://www.namibian.com.na/90193/read/Concerns-over-Emergency-Income-Grant.
- Rasmeni, Mandisa. 2020. “NamPower Joins Fight Against COVID-19 with Toilets, Water Tanks and Sanitising Agent.” Economist, April 22. Accessed April 27, 2020. https://economist.com.na/52440/general-news/nampower-donates-towards-the-covid-19-pandemic/.
- Remmert, Dietrich. 2016. Water Governance in Namibia: A Tale of Delayed Implementation, Policy Shortfalls, and Miscommunication. Windhoek: Institute for Public Policy Research.
- Republic of Namibia. 1990. Constitution of the Republic of Namibia. Windhoek: Government of the Republic of Namibia.
- Repubic of Namibia. 2009. National Housing Policy. Windhoek: Government Printers.
- Republic of Namibia. 2001. Education Act (Act No. 16 of 2001), as Amended. Windhoek: Government Printers.
- Republic of Namibia. 2004. Namibia Vision 2030, Policy Framework for Longterm National Development (Main Document). Windhoek: National Planning Commission.
- Republic of Namibia. 2017. NDP4 Terminal Report 2012/13–2016/17. Windhoek: Government Printers.
- Republic of Namibia. 2020a. State of Emergency COVID-19 Regulations: Namibian Constitution, as Amendend. Windhoek: Government Printers.
- Republic of Namibia. 2020b. Government Notice No. 104 - Directive Relating to Regional Councils and Local Authority Councils: Covid-19 Regulations. Windhoek: Government Printers.
- Rodney, Walter. 1972. How Europe Underdeveloped Africa. London: Bogle-L'Ouverture Publications.
- Roemer, John. 1994. A Future for Socialism. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
- Schmidt, Matthias. 2009. Poverty and Inequality in Namibia: An Overview. Windhoek: Institute for Public Policy Research.
- Sepúlveda, Magdalena. 2012. “Unacceptable Inequalities Persist 20 Years after Independence – UN Poverty Expert.” Relief Web. October 8. Accessed April 22, 2020. https://reliefweb.int/report/namibia/%E2%80%9Cunacceptable-inequalities-persist-20-years-after-independence%E2%80%9D-%E2%80%93-un-poverty-expert.
- Shangula, Kalumbi. 2020a. Update by Dr Kalumbi Shangula, Minister of Health and Social Services on Covid-19 in Namibia. Windhoek: Ministry of Health and Social Services.
- Shangula, Kalumbi. 2020b. Countrywide Lockdown on Account of COVID-19 Pandemic. Windhoek: Ministry of Health and Social Services.
- Shiimi, Iipumbu. 2020. Media Statement - Economic Stimulus and Relief Package: Impact of COVID-19 on the Economy and Households. Windhoek: Republic of Namibia.
- Shikalepo, Elock E. 2019. “The Constitutionality of Free Education in Namibia: A Statutory Review.” International Journal of Latest Research in Humanities and Social Science 2 (9): 115–121.
- Shikongo, Arlana. 2020. “Partial Lockdown in Effect from Friday.” The Namibian, March 24. Accessed April 28, 2020. https://www.namibian.com.na/199422/archive-read/Partial-lockdown-in-effect-from-Friday.
- Shinovene, Immanuel. 2015. “Namibia’s House Prices Spark Land Grab Fears.” Mail & Guardian, February 19. Accessed April 28, 2020. https://mg.co.za/article/2015-02-19-namibias-house-prices-spark-land-grab-fears/.
- Smit, Nico. 2011a. Shangula Argues BIG will only ‘Alleviate Poverty’. August 12. Accessed May 7, 2020. https://www.namibian.com.na/83953/archive-read/Shangula-argues-BIG-will-only-alleviate-poverty.
- Smit, Nico. 2011b. “Housing Backlog Blamed on Slow Land Delivery.” The Namibian, October 31. Accessed April 27, 2020. https://www.namibian.com.na/index.php?id=87489&page=archive-read.
- Social Security Commission. 2020. “Stimulus Package Information.” Social Security Commission. April 20. Accessed May 7, 2020. https://www.ssc.org.na/resources/STIMULUS_PACKAGE_INFORMATION.pdf.
- SWAPO. 1981. To Be Born a Nation: The Liberation Struggle for Namibia. London: Zed Press.
- SWAPO. 1989. SWAPO Election Manifesto. Windhoek: SWAPO.
- The World Bank. 2017. Does Namibia’s Fiscal Policy Benefit the Poor and Reduce Inequality? June 13. Accessed April 27, 2020. https://www.worldbank.org/en/country/namibia/publication/does-namibias-fiscal-policy-benefit-the-poor-and-reduce-inequality.
- The World Bank. 2019. Overview - Namibia. October 4. Accessed April 28, 2020. https://www.worldbank.org/en/country/namibia/overview.
- UNDP. 2019. “Human Development Report 2019: Inequalities in Human Development in the 21stCentury - Briefing note for countries on the 2019 Human Development Report.” UNDP. December 11. Accessed May 13, 2020. http://hdr.undp.org/sites/all/themes/hdr_theme/country-notes/NAM.pdf.
- United States Agency for International Development. 2006. “Quality Primary Education.” United States Agency for International Development. Accessed April 27, 2020. https://web.archive.org/web/20080816151933/http://www.usaid.gov/na/so2.htm.
- Van Rooy, Gert, Benjamin Roberts, Christa Schier, Jannie Swartz, and Sebastian Levine. 2006. “Income Poverty and Inequality in Namibia.” In Multi-Disciplinary Research and Consultancy Centre, 1–19. Windhoek: University of Namibia.
- Vigne, Randolph. 1987. “SWAPO of Namibia: A Movement in Exile.” Third World Quarterly 9 (1): 85–107.
- World Health Organisation. 2020. “Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19): Situation Report –78.” December 19. Accessed December 20, 2020. https://covid19.who.int/.