Office extract for citation on panduleniitula.com (draft). Ligature and line-break cleanup only. Media-inquiry footers and party profile copy from the PDF are not reprinted. Some office PDFs print Independence Patriots or Leader of the Official Opposition; this site keeps Independent Patriots for Change and does not treat the opposition-leader heading as a finding. This extract is the office wording, not a finding of this site. Filename as supplied: PRESS STATEMENT_ECN_PRESIDENT.pdf 09 JULY 2026 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE STATEMENT BY THE LEADER OF THE OFFICIAL OPPOSITION – DR. PANDULENI ITULA ON THE NOMINATION OF COMMISSIONERS FOR THE ELECTORAL COMMISION OF NAMIBIA (ECN). 1. The IPC has today reviewed the two letters sent by Her Excellency President Netumbo Nandi-Ndaitwah from State House to the Speaker of the National Assembly, dated 08 June 2026 and 10 June 2026 respectively, recommending individuals for appointment to the Electoral Commission of Namibia (ECN). 2. Having examined these letters alongside the Constitution of the Republic of Namibia and the Electoral Act, Act 5 of 2014, the IPC places the following on public record. 3. The process is constitutionally defective. The President's own letters confirm it. The matter before the National Assembly is not properly before the House. 4. What the President's Letters Actually Say: a. Letter 1 — 08 June 2026 (nominating Ms. Emmerentia Leonard and Ms. Julieta Diva Ferreira): "Honourable Speaker, therefore, in terms of Section 6(17) of the Electoral Act, Act No. 5 of 2014, I hereby nominate the following individuals for approval by the National Assembly for appointment as Members of the Electoral Commission of Namibia for the period of five (5) years from the date of their appointment..." b. Letter 2 — 10 June 2026 (nominating Dr. Gerson Sindano): "Honourable Speaker, therefore, in terms of Section 6(17) of the Electoral Act, Act No. 5 of 2014, I hereby nominate the following individual for approval by the National Assembly for appointment as Chairperson of the Electoral Commission of Namibia, until his term comes to an end..." 5. Now read what the Constitution says: Article 94B of the Constitution of the Republic of Namibia: "The members of the Electoral Commission shall be appointed by the President with the approval of the National Assembly..." 6. The Constitution says "appointed." The President's letters say "nominate... for approval... for appointment." These are not the same words. They are not the same legal act. They are not the same constitutional process. 7. FOUR CONFIRMED CONSTITUTIONAL DEFECTS – Defect One — "Nominate" is not "Appoint." 8. A nomination is a proposal and an appointment is a completed legal act. The Constitution gives the President the power of appointment not nomination. The President has not exercised the constitutional power. She has exercised a lesser, non-constitutional act. The National Assembly cannot transform a nomination into an appointment by approving it. The constitutional trigger has not been pulled. Defect Two — The subject heading of both letters says "Recommendation." 9. Both letters are titled: "Recommendation for the Appointment of Members of the Electoral Commission of Namibia." A recommendation is not an appointment. The President is recommending. The Constitution requires appointing. These are not interchangeable. Defect Three — Dr. Sindano's letter specifies no proper term. 10. Letter 1, for Leonard and Ferreira, specifies "five (5) years from the date of their appointment." Letter 2, for Sindano, says only "until his term comes to an end." What term? From when? Until when? This is not a term of appointment, it is a reference to an existing term whose duration is not stated. An appointment without a defined term is an incomplete act. The Assembly cannot approve what has not been fully defined. Defect Four — The letters are addressed to the Speaker personally, not tabled before the House. 11. Both letters are private communications from the President to "Honourable Saara Kuugongelwa-Amadhila, Speaker." The House has not received a formal constitutional instrument. The Speaker has received a private letter. That is not the same as the House receiving a constitutional instrument of appointment for approval. The Assembly's function under Article 94B is triggered by an appointment made by the President, not by a private letter to the Speaker recommending nominations. The Wrong Legal Basis 12. Both letters cite Section 6(17) of the Electoral Act as their authority. The Electoral Act is subordinate legislation. Article 1(6) of the Constitution makes the Constitution supreme. If Section 6(17) uses "nominate" where Article 94B requires "appoint," then Section 6(17) is to that extent inconsistent with the Constitution and void. You cannot use a subordinate law to bypass the supreme law. The Government's Own Standard — Ignored 13. Government Gazette No. 8896 (27 April 2026) required every applicant to declare under oath whether they are an office-bearer of a political party, an active politician, or have a high party-political profile. That is the government's own standard, published in its own gazette, signed by the Secretary of the National Assembly. 14. The IPC has asked a simple question: where are those sworn declarations for each nominee? The bundle before the House contains CVs, certificates, and identity documents. It does not contain the sworn declarations the government itself required. If the nominees have nothing to hide, they have nothing to fear from a sworn declaration. The public is entitled to ask why those declarations have not been produced. The IPC therefore puts on record that we: First, we will formally object on the floor of the National Assembly to any vote being taken on this motion. The motion is constitutionally defective on its face. It must be returned to the President for compliance with Article 94B. Second, we call on the President to withdraw the current nominations, make a formal appointment in compliance with Article 94B, specify the term of office for each appointee, particularly for Dr. Sindano and table the instrument of appointment. Third, we call on all nominees to publicly declare, under oath or solemn affirmation, whether they hold or have held membership of any political party, whether they have held office in any political party, and whether they have made any public statements of partisan political support consistent with the criteria the Secretary of the National Assembly published in Government Gazette No. 8896. Fourth, if the Assembly proceeds to vote on the motion over our constitutional objection, the IPC will seek urgent relief from the High Court of Namibia, including a declaratory order that the motion does not comply with Article 94B, and an interdict preventing the nominees from taking up office pending the determination of the constitutional challenge. In closing to the Namibian people 15. The Electoral Commission of Namibia is not an ordinary body. It is the institution that will run the next general election. It is the institution that will determine whether Namibia's democracy is real or performative. The Constitution requires its members to be appointed through a specific, transparent process precisely because their independence from any political party, including the ruling party is non-negotiable. 16. We are not questioning the personal qualifications of the nominees. We are questioning the process. And the process is not ours to question, it is the Constitution's to require. When the government bypasses the constitutional appointment process for the body that runs our elections, every Namibian should be paying attention. I thank you, Namibia is all we have Namibia is not for sale We must and can save it! ISSUED BY: PANDULENI ITULA (DR.) PRESIDENT – INDEPENDENCE PATRIOTS FOR CHANGE (IPC)