Judge Ueitele warns AR leader Amupanda over social media comments on redline case

Affirmative Repositioning leader Job Amupanda has received a warning about making comments on social media platforms about his court battle against Namibia’s veterinary cordon fence (redline).

Judge Shafimana Ueitele asked one of Amupanda’s lawyers, Mbushandje Ntinda, at the end of a hearing in the Windhoek High Court on Friday to convey to his client that Ueitele will not tolerate it if Amupanda continues to make comments about the redline case and cast aspersions on his opponents in the matter on social media.

It is a time-honoured principle that while a matter is pending in court, parties in the case must refrain from commenting and making suggestions about the matter, “so as to remove any impression of trying to coerce, to influence the court to come to a specific conclusion”, Ueitele said.

He made the remarks after senior counsel Raymond Heathcote informed him that Amupanda keeps posting commentary about the case before Ueitele on social media, and also insults lawyers involved in the matter.

While his case, in which he is trying to have the erection of the veterinary cordon fence declared unconstitutional and get a court order for the fence to be removed, is pending in court, Amupanda “just fights his case on social media, and I want him not to do it, pending [the court’s] judgement”, Heathcote said.

“It’s actually contempt [of court] to fight the thing in the media […] but it should stop,” said Heathcote, who is representing the Livestock and Livestock Products Board of Namibia.

Ntinda responded that it was an attempt to take away Amupanda’s rights to use his social media platforms. “The suggestion is just malicious,” he remarked.

Addressing Ntinda, Ueitele said: “We have created institutions for ourselves, and those institutions must function, whether you like them or don’t like them. The court is there to resolve disputes impartially, without undue influence.

“There’s no way you can keep commenting and making aspersions on parties appearing before court in a given case. That’s an indirect assault on them, and that I will not tolerate.”

Ntinda should convey that to Amupanda, Ueitele added.

Heathcote raised the issue of Amupanda’s use of social media at the end of a hearing in which lawyers representing the defendants, who are opposing Amupanda’s attempt to have the veterinary cordon fence removed, argued that his claim should in effect be dismissed at the end of his case, without them being required to present their testimony to the court.

Ueitele reserved his judgement on the defendants’ application for absolution from the instance, and postponed the delivery of his judgement to 27 March.