The new uranium exploration license in the Stampriet Artesian Basin threatens the indigenous communities.

 

Ovaherero is an indigenous pastoralist community; as pastoralists, they derived their livelihoods from breeding and taking care of livestock. Therefore, Land, territories, and related resource rights are of fundamental importance to them since they constitute the basis of their economic livelihood and are the sources of their spiritual, cultural, and social identity.  The land is the basis for the life and culture of Ovaherero and other indigenous peoples in Namibia. Without access to and respect for their rights to their lands, territories, and natural resources, indigenous peoples' diverse cultures and ability to determine their own development and future are demoralized.

The new uranium exploration license in the Stampriet Artesian Basin threatens the indigenous communities in these areas, and that raises many questions. Considering Uranium mining has far-reaching effects, polluting the environment with radioactive dust, radon gas, waterborne toxins, and increased background radiation. In addition to the effects of physical environmental changes from mining and milling processes, human health and environmental impacts can arise from both the radioactive and chemical properties of mine and milling tailings, tailings, and other wastes.

In order to plan and implement the necessary measures to open mining and milling sites, it is important to characterize the local situation (e.g. radionuclide concentrations, type of residues, geological and hydrological conditions, etc.) including pre-operational conditions. and to conduct an assessment of the short- and long-term effects on human health and the environment. However, it is increasingly accepted that there are potential impacts on the entire ecosystem that should also be considered. In addition, the hazards associated with non-radioactive materials from uranium production can be significant and need to be assessed accordingly.

Seen from the perspective of indigenous knowledge researchers, I am not moved by this treatment because the Namibian government initially refuses to recognize that there are indigenous communities in Namibia. As such, they tend to be labeled as marginalized or minority groups, in denial of recognition of ancestral land rights.

Instead, the legal framework for the management and stewardship of the land was largely driven by a modernization ethic aimed at privatizing and individualizing land ownership. Hence, the introduction of a modern tenancy system by colonialism, continued by post-independence government policies and legislation, has made the rights of pastoralists and indigenous communities insecure. Subsequently, Land reforms have largely been accompanied by a subtle delegitimization of pastoralism, particularly nomadic pastoralism, as boundaries and permanence are the norms. This situation continues in post-independent Namibia, where indigenous communities see their traditional lands increasingly threatened, claimed, or expropriated in favor of agriculture, mineral exploitation, and other economic activities.

Pastoralism relies on flexible and negotiated cross-border access to land and resources, which is not provided for in many land reform processes. National legislation and policies have emphasized agrarian reform. The failure of policy and law to recognize and provide for pastoralist production strategies has left the people living in these areas vulnerable.

This Namibian government's refusal of indigenous peoples’ rights to lands, territories and other natural resources by the state will results in a situation of unclear and overlapping claims to lands, especially at a time when pressure on lands and resources is exacerbated by a large increase in land investments, population growth, growing demand for energy and food, and the impacts of climate change; this, in turn, constitutes one of the major drivers of conflict, instability and environmental degradation. This is what will remain in the light of day for the community in response to this denial of their rights and dignity.

In my conclusion, the absence of a national legal framework for the rights of pastoralists and indigenous communities in Namibia, the respondents to this exploration license for uranium and other projects in areas where the indigenous community lives, without proper advice or even consideration of their traditional indigenous way of life, should draw primarily on constitutional and international law and only minimally on common, statutory and common law as the other components of Namibia's pluralistic legal system.

The need to advance Namibian pastoral and indigenous community policy and law to meet their needs is more pressing. Furthermore, this community has been threatened by a policy that sees all Namibians as one. However, this threat is adequately covered under the pretense of one Namibia, one nation that encourages sedentarization and land privatization. Its marginalization is reflected in the weak presence of pastoralism in national land reform and economic policies and its 2030 Vision. However, this approach fails to secure pastoral and indigenous community rights to land, pasture, and water. There was no coherent political, legal, or institutional framework supporting the customary land tenure that gives most pastoralists access to land and essential resources. Security will only be achieved when these rights are protected more formally, through the establishment of effective systems of government willing and able to defend pastoral and indigenous community rights to land and key resources.

I rest my case, please subscribe and leave your comments below:

Written By: Alphons Kahuhu Koruhama: Computer Scientist and Indigenous Knowledge Researcher.