The release of the 5th Boundaries Delimitation and Demarcation Commission’s report in Namibia has reignited debate about regional boundaries and the addition of constituencies.
While the report recommends no new regions, it suggests adjustments to existing boundaries and 10 new constituencies amid concerns that frequent boundary changes undermine political stability and the principles of democracy.
Namibia, with a population of just over three million, already has 14 regions – far more than larger neighbouring countries such as South Africa (nine provinces for over 60 million people) and Angola (18 provinces for over 30 million people).
Increasing regions and constituencies often comes with high administrative and financial costs, including more councillors’ salaries, office construction and procurement processes.
For a country facing pressing socio-economic challenges, resources would be better spent on service delivery rather than duplicating administrative layers.
Establishing permanent regions with fixed constituencies would provide stability, allow for better long-term planning and avoid unnecessary disruptions to governance.
It would also remove the frequent political and administrative debates about boundaries and focus attention on delivering services to citizens.
NON-SUSTAINABILITY
Continuously adjusting regions and constituencies poses sustainability challenges for Namibia.
Each new region or constituency requires significant resources to establish administrative offices, appoint officials, and construct facilities.
For instance, it involves costs related to procuring vehicles, hiring personnel and securing necessary infrastructure, including water, electricity and roads.
This can take years, particularly given Namibia’s bureaucratic procurement system.
Moreover, the added financial burden extends beyond initial set-up costs.
Sustaining additional regions involves recurring expenses such as councillors’ salaries, benefits and operational allowances.
These expenses strain an already limited national budget, diverting funds from critical sectors like health, education and water provision.
As Namibia faces pressing developmental challenges, such as unemployment, water scarcity and poverty reduction, adding layers of governance is unsustainable and diverts focus away from the needs of citizens.
IMPACT ON ELECTIONS
Boundary demarcation can significantly influence elections, shaping political representation and outcomes.
- Demarcation seeks to create constituencies with balanced populations to ensure equitable representation. However, frequent changes can destabilise this balance, potentially marginalising communities.
- Introducing 10 new constituencies will change how political parties campaign, allocate resources and engage voters. This is particularly challenging for smaller parties that often lack sufficient resources.
- Changes in boundaries can create perceptions of bias, especially if adjustments are seen as politically motivated, leading to reduced voter trust in the electoral system.
- New constituencies force political parties to re-strategise in unfamiliar land, sometimes disadvantaging parties with established support in existing boundaries.
A DANGEROUS PRECEDENT
Frequent boundary adjustments also create opportunities for gerrymandering, where political actors can manipulate boundaries for electoral gain.
This undermines democracy by allowing leaders to choose their voters rather than voters choosing their leaders.
For example, in the United States, gerrymandering has produced oddly shaped districts designed to favour certain political parties, diluting the influence of communities and weakening voter confidence.
Gerrymandering has also perpetuated political polarisation and diminished minority representation, making it a cautionary tale for Namibia.
LESSONS FROM KENYA
Kenya provides a critical example of the perils of frequent boundary adjustments.
Its Independent Electoral and Boundaries Commission has faced allegations of political interference, inefficiency and lack of transparency.
During Kenya’s 2013 and 2017 elections, disputes over boundary adjustments led to political instability, ethnic tensions and public mistrust in the electoral process.
In densely populated areas like Nairobi, disputes over constituency boundaries created perceptions that certain communities were deliberately marginalised.
The Kenyan experience demonstrates how politicised boundary delimitation can exacerbate divisions, disrupt governance and erode public trust.
Namibia must avoid similar pitfalls by ensuring its boundary commission operates transparently and independently.
South Africa has maintained permanent provinces, ensuring stability in governance, although occasional municipal boundary adjustments spark local debates.
Zambia and Zimbabwe also maintain manageable numbers of regions to prioritise service delivery.
In Hong Kong, China, gerrymandering in electoral autocracies has shown how boundary manipulation undermines opposition power and democratic principles.
THE WAY FORWARD
To prevent gerrymandering and mitigate the financial and administrative costs of frequent boundary changes, Namibia should:
- Establish permanent regions: Freeze the creation of new regions and limit boundary adjustments unless absolutely necessary for equitable representation.
- Strengthen independence: Ensure that the Boundaries Delimitation and Demarcation Commission operates transparently and free from political interference.
- Data-driven adjustments: Base boundary changes on accurate population data and needs, avoiding emotional or political motivations.
- Prioritise service delivery: Focus national resources on infrastructure, healthcare and education rather than expanding administrative layers.
- Legislate against gerrymandering: Enact laws to prohibit politically motivated boundary adjustments and safeguard democratic principles.
CONCLUSION
Frequent changes to regions and constituencies in Namibia come with financial burdens, administrative inefficiencies and the risk of gerrymandering.
Kenya’s experience shows how boundary disputes can fuel political instability, ethnic tensions and public mistrust.
By adopting permanent regions and fixed constituencies, Namibia can strengthen its democracy, ensure political stability and focus on critical developmental needs.
Emphasising governance over geographic expansion will enable the nation to channel its resources toward service delivery and sustainable growth.
- Lot Ndamanomhata is a graduate of public management, journalism and communication. This article is written in his personal capacity.
Stay informed with The Namibian – your source for credible journalism. Get in-depth reporting and opinions for
only N$85 a month. Invest in journalism, invest in democracy –
Subscribe Now!