Decentralisation: Namibia’s Political Dream Still Waiting to Become Reality

Nearly three decades after Namibia adopted decentralisation as an important pillar of democratic governance, the country finds itself confronting an uncomfortable reality: decentralisation remains more of a political aspiration than a fully realised system of government.

The language has been with us for years.

We have spoken about bringing government closer to the people, empowering regions, strengthening local participation and allowing communities to have a greater say in decisions affecting their lives.

But the question that must now be asked is simple: what exactly have we decentralised?

The Third National Council and Regional Councils Consultative Conference in Otjiwarongo offers an opportunity to confront this question without the usual political niceties.

The information presented to Parliament in July is revealing. Forty-two functions from six ministries have been coordinated for decentralisation, but most have been delegated rather than devolved.

That distinction matters enormously.

Delegation means regional councils perform functions on behalf of central government. Devolution means those councils acquire the authority to exercise those functions in their own capacity.

In other words, delegation can bring administration closer to citizens without necessarily bringing political power closer to citizens.

And perhaps this is where Namibia’s decentralisation project has become stuck.

We have created regional councils, elected regional representatives and established institutions intended to give communities a greater voice. Yet the most important decisions, resources and authority remain heavily concentrated at the centre.

This raises a fundamental question: can decentralisation succeed without decentralising power?

The answer should concern every Namibian.

A regional councillor who must continually look towards Windhoek for permission, funding or direction is not necessarily an empowered local representative. In many instances, such a councillor may simply be the face of a centralised government system at regional level.

That is not necessarily what the architects of decentralisation envisaged.

Decentralisation should fundamentally be about changing where decisions are made. It should mean that decisions about communities are increasingly made by institutions that understand those communities, within a framework of national standards, accountability and oversight.

But that requires more than transferring functions.

It requires transferring authority.

It requires transferring resources.

And, perhaps most importantly, it requires transferring responsibility.

This is why the concerns raised at the conference about inadequate funding, limited capacity and poor coordination cannot be treated as administrative inconveniences.

They are central to the success or failure of decentralisation.

Government allocated N$17.848 million for decentralisation activities during the 2025/26 financial year, including work related to transferring gazetted functions and assessing implementation. An inter-governmental fiscal transfer policy is also being developed.

These are important steps.

But decentralisation without predictable financial resources risks becoming an exercise in political symbolism.

It is difficult to tell regional councils that they are becoming more powerful while simultaneously expecting them to operate with inadequate resources.

The same applies to the Regional and Constituency Development Fund Bill, which remains at the Second Reading stage in the National Assembly after being introduced in 2024.

After nearly three decades, Namibia should be able to answer much more clearly how regional institutions are expected to finance the responsibilities they are being asked to assume.

There is another uncomfortable reality that must be acknowledged.

True decentralisation inevitably means that central government must surrender some control.

That is the essence of the exercise.

It is difficult to decentralise meaningfully if Windhoek retains the final say over most important decisions, while regional councils are expected to take responsibility for outcomes.

Decentralisation therefore requires political trust.

Central government must trust regional institutions with greater authority. Regional institutions must demonstrate that they can exercise that authority responsibly. And citizens must be given mechanisms to hold both levels of government accountable.

This is not an argument for weakening the state.

On the contrary, it is an argument for making the state work better.

Otjozondjupa Governor John Julius //Khamuseb correctly shifted the conversation towards outcomes when he argued that participation should be measured by whether it has a meaningful influence on decisions and development.

That should become Namibia’s yardstick.

The ordinary citizen does not care whether a function is described as delegated, devolved or coordinated.

The unemployed young person wants an opportunity.

The farmer wants productive infrastructure and access to markets.

The mother wants reliable water, sanitation, healthcare and education.

The community wants roads, services and economic opportunities.

Their question is not whether decentralisation exists on paper.

Their question is whether government closer to them actually makes their lives better.

This is where Namibia needs a more honest national conversation.

We need to stop treating decentralisation as a permanent conference theme and start treating it as a measurable governance programme.

Government should clearly identify which functions will be devolved, which will remain national responsibilities, what resources will accompany each function, what capacity regional councils require and when the transfers will happen.

Regional councils, in turn, must accept that greater authority means greater accountability. Decentralisation cannot become a convenient mechanism for shifting responsibility without improving performance.

And citizens must be placed at the centre of the process.

After almost 30 years, Namibia cannot continue to speak about decentralisation as though it is something that will eventually arrive.

It is already here, but only partially.

The political dream has survived. What remains unfinished is its translation into political reality.

Namibia has built the institutions. It has held the conferences. It has passed policies and introduced legislation.

Now it must answer the harder question: are we genuinely prepared to give regional government the power and resources necessary to govern, or do we merely want the appearance of decentralisation while keeping the substance in Windhoek?

That is the question the country should be debating.

Because decentralisation is not ultimately about government structures.

It is about power.

And after three decades, Namibia must decide whether it is finally ready to share it.