The immigration debate must be guided by law, not emotion

Immigration is one of the defining public policy challenges of the modern world. From Europe and North America to Africa, governments are grappling with how to protect national interests while remaining faithful to constitutional values, international obligations and human dignity.

Namibia is no exception. Rising unemployment, economic stagnation and growing public frustration have inevitably brought questions about immigration, work permits and border control into sharper focus.

The latest exchange between former Prime Minister Nahas Angula and NUDO parliamentarian Vetaruhe Kandorozu reflects a debate that deserves serious national attention. However, it also reminds us that how a nation discusses immigration is just as important as the policies it ultimately adopts.

There should be no controversy over one fundamental principle: every sovereign state has both the right and the obligation to regulate who enters its borders, who works within its economy and who qualifies for residence or citizenship. Immigration laws exist for precisely this reason. If those laws are being violated, government institutions must act decisively and consistently.

On this point, Angula’s position deserves careful consideration. His assertion that Namibia is governed by law and that immigration violations should be handled by the relevant authorities reinforces an essential democratic principle. When enforcement shifts from institutions to public mobilisation against particular groups of people, the line between legitimate civic activism and vigilantism becomes dangerously thin.