Thread: "The Father of the Nation"

The late politician, Hans-Erik Staby, felt strongly that Founding President Nujoma indubitably deserves the title of “Father of Swapo”, but he is not necessarily a leader of exceptional national distinction. What do you think?

The title “Founding Father of the Nation” was conferred on former President Sam Nujoma by means of an Act of Parliament, an award allegedly fathered by him and supported by his party political majority.

Not surprisingly, an appreciable annual income is attached to the title - in money and in kind - as well as amazingly lavish provisions for support staff and personal assistants, presumably for the duration of his life. It would seem that the title is likely to expire when he has to pay his dues to Father Time, which might well mean that Namibia will then be orphaned. Improbable as it may be, it might in theory even lead to a fresh Act of Parliament to anoint a successor.

Elsewhere in this world the rank “Father of the Nation” is customarily conferred - not by an Act of Parliament-, but rather informally, only on exceptionally benevolent individuals who have rendered extraordinary services to the unification of a nation, who are widely recognised by the people as compassionate and venerable men, without supporting legislation to this end. The status conferred upon such individuals (often posthumously) is usually uncontroversial. It does not entail the risk of dispute, which could well be the case with an award on the basis of an Act of Parliament.

The title “Founding Father” to Sam Nujoma creates the impression that is has been awarded predominantly due to his contribution to the birth of the independent Republic of Namibia – our nation. Were this the case, then the question arises whether or not the incumbent is burdened with any additional responsibilities over and above the not inconsiderable privileges, or is the title merely akin to a Medal of Honour without further responsibilities?

We have to ask ourselves what are the obligations and privileges, in essence what are the characteristics of a “Father of the Nation”. Were this honour indisputable, the incumbent would be expected to rise above party political considerations and interests, which currently is obviously not the case.

On the contrary, Nujoma’s political predilection is irrefutable and his conduct accordingly controversial. He will clearly always act first and foremost in the interest of his party, especially in the event that his power base is threatened, (as is the case since very recently) and not necessarily in the interest of the Nation as a whole.

There is considerable evidence that would confirm his reputation as an exceptionally robust and capable party-political leader. Nujoma indubitably deserves the title of “Father of Swapo”, but he is not necessarily a leader of exceptional national distinction.

His first and most important loyalty consistently appears to be the Party, rather than the nation, not the other way around, as it ought to be in the case of a “Father of the Nation”.

Be this as it may, in a real democracy, party-political majorities come and go, and power is gained and lost. Unless, therefore, a party-political leader is able to rise above mundane party issues in word and deed, unless he is able to make a major contribution to the unification of the diverse people of Namibia into a nation of substance within the parameters of the Constitution, - perhaps even at the risk of sacrificing some power - he does not really deserve the title “Father of the Nation”.

It thus appears that the award of “Founding Father of the Nation” conferred upon Nujoma is quite legitimate but is akin to a Medal of Honour and that Namibia remains in need of a real “Father of the Nation” which need not be confirmed by an Act of Parliament - witness the personality and dynamic contribution to national reconciliation and unity by Nelson Mandela, who is widely respected by all factions as the father of the South African Nation.

Hans-Erik Staby

Windhoek, January 2008