Are Swapo directives effective?
It is often in the political engagements of various movements that deal in politics that directives are given in guiding manifestations of particular pursuits or mitigating specific behavioral trends by members of such political movements.
Ordinarily, directives serve to inform the inputs to the processes or tendencies that have material implications to the political texture and positioning of a given political party. Generally, it is through issuance of directives and observance of same, that a political party can assess the loyalty and obedience of its members. If it so happen that the party’s directives are being disregarded, such conducts constitute offences in the party’s over-arching considerations and would warrant disciplinary measures against the unruly members and/or as the case may be.
The above practice is not unique to the political business of the Swapo party. Accordingly a number of directives have been issued within the framework of engagement of the Almighty Swapo party. The last born of the series of the Swapo party directives emanates from the 2013 extra-ordinary congress held in Swakopmund.
The directives came in pursuant to unbecoming behaviour of SPYL’s leadership that decorated the last quarter of 2012, subsequent to the first quarter of 2013.
Effectively, the directive was a design to counter the said behaviors and was to the effect that the wing’s leadership should for all intents and purposes cease its retrogressive and yet embarrassing engagements and/or expressions. Further that, in moving forward, all press releases and/or public statements should be vetted for sanctioning by the office of Swapo’s secretary-general (SG).
From the above premises, as a bona fide member of Swapo and as any loyal cadre would, I took issue with an article that had appeared in a local daily on Friday 28th March 2014, sponsored by one Elijah Ngurare, secretary of SPYL, titled; “The Politics of Tender Connection”.
In the said article, Ngurare clearly indicated he wrote the same in his designated capacity as secretary of SPYL.
One wonders therefore, whether or not the author had sought the approval of Swapo’s SG’s office before publishing the article, or if he merely chose to sponsor gross deviance of the Swapo party’s directives.
Referring to the recent placement of an individual on Government payroll without the position being advertised or the said person being interviewed, can Ngurare inform this nation when and where the position he occupied as a personal assistant to the late John Pandeni (may his soul rest in peace) was advertised and who were the panel members who conducted this interview?
Lastly, I would like to inform Ngurare that “smooth speeches do not make a dynamic leader”. Period!