The prolonged delay in appointing a substantive director general at the Namibian Broadcasting Corporation (NBC) raises serious questions about governance, ethics, and the stewardship of an important public institution.
Replacing Stanley Similo, whose contract ended when he reached retirement age last year, is not merely a staffing issue. It is a test of whether public institutions in Namibia are governed in the national interest or in the interests of individuals.
Similo has been kept on short-term contracts, and the hunt for his replacement seems to have stalled after interviews were conducted late last year.
NBC belongs to the Namibian people, not to boards, executives, or factions within the organisation. Any conduct that undermines transparent leadership succession erodes public trust and weakens accountability.
Globally accepted governance frameworks are clear on this point. Both the King IV Report on Corporate Governance and the OECD principles governing state-owned enterprises emphasise ethical leadership, accountability, and continuity of institutions over individuals.
Public entities must be resilient, not person-dependent.
MYTH OF IRREPLACEABILITY
The suggestion, implicit or otherwise, that certain individuals must remain in place because “no one else can implement what they started” is not only false; it is dangerous. No credible institution should ever be built around the belief that it cannot function without specific individuals.
It further questions Similo’s effectiveness as a leader, as it is clear that for the 10 years he has been at the helm, he has not groomed a successor.
King IV explicitly requires governing bodies to ensure succession planning and leadership continuity. The OECD similarly warns against the concentration of power and the erosion of institutional independence through prolonged or manipulated transitions.
Namibia has no shortage of capable professionals. To argue otherwise is to insult the country’s skills base and to admit institutional weakness.
Boards exist to provide oversight, not to entrench themselves or protect executive interests. Fixed terms exist precisely to prevent stagnation, conflicts of interest, and abuse of influence.
Deliberate delays in executive appointments, especially where interview processes have already concluded, create governance vacuums that invite suspicion and undermine legitimacy.
Even the perception that appointment delays are being used to influence contracts, protect past decisions, or sideline independent voices is deeply damaging. Ethical governance demands not only lawful conduct but also decisions that are visibly fair, impartial, and beyond reproach.
MERIT OVER COMFORT
If a candidate emerged as the preferred outcome of a lawful and competitive interview process, that outcome must be respected unless there are legitimate grounds to overturn it. Disqualifying or sidelining candidates because they ask difficult questions or challenge entrenched practices is the opposite of good governance.
Both King IV and OECD principles stress merit-based appointments and independence of leadership. Boards are not mandated to redesign outcomes to suit personal comfort or institutional fear.
THE ROLE OF THE STATE
The Ministry of Information and Communication Technology has a responsibility to intervene when governance processes stall without justification. OECD public governance standards recognise the duty of shareholder ministries to safeguard accountability, transparency, and institutional integrity in state-owned entities.
Where confidence has been weakened, decisive action, including independent reviews or forensic audits, is not an act of hostility. It is an act of stewardship in defence of public resources and public trust.
NATIONAL INTEREST
NBC is a national asset. Its leadership must be chosen in the open, based on merit, and in line with governance principles that place the institution above individuals.
No board or executive has a moral claim to extended influence based on fear of exposure, fear of accountability, or fear of change. Leadership renewal is not a threat; it is a necessity.
Namibia’s governance frameworks are clear. The moment demands courage, decisiveness, and respect for process and no one is bigger than the institution.
-Ruben Francisco is passionate about corporate governance.
