Namoloh is the leading case on the definition of an accused in Namibia. It is true that, so far, there have been quite some confusion on the definition of ‘accused.’ For instance, the Criminal Procedure Act does not describe the accused and actually refer to the person through the sentencing process ‘the accused’ even if the accused has already been ‘convicted’. The Namoloh case therefore stabilizes criminal law in Namibia by clarifying who does and who does not qualify as an ‘accused’.
Nonetheless, the way in which the Supreme Court resolved the question of permanent stays of prosecution contradicts the Supreme Court’s own jurisprudence on the interpretation of the Constitution. Instead of reading the Constitution liberally and purposively in the value-laden manner that former Chief Justice Mahomed ushered in, the Supreme Court adopted a narrow, tunnel-visioned interpretation. Hopefully, the higher courts will reverse this aspect of the Namoloh judgment before long.
Zongwe, Dunia P.
"Prosecutor-General of Namibia v Namoloh and Others 2020 (3) NR 839 (SC),"
SAIPAR Case Review: Vol. 4:
1, Article 8.
Available at: https://scholarship.law.cornell.edu/scr/vol4/iss1/8