Court dumps fired RA bosses’ urgent bid
The Windhoek High Court has struck from the roll an urgent application by former Roads Authority (RA) executives Johan Boois and Richard Milinga, dealing a setback to their attempt to return to their posts after being dismissed over a controversial N$16 million vehicle procurement matter.
The matter delivered by Judge Nate Ndauendapo was regarded as finalised and removed from the roll with no order as to costs.
Boois, the former executive officer for transportation, and Milinga, the former divisional manager for the transport inspectorate, had approached the court seeking urgent reinstatement following their dismissal earlier this year after an internal disciplinary process.
The pair argued that the RA mishandled both the disciplinary proceedings and subsequent appeal process, claiming the proceedings were riddled with procedural flaws, irregularities and interference.
Represented by lawyer Uno Katjipuka, the two maintained that their right to a fair hearing had been compromised by what they described as employer pressure, predetermined deadlines and irregular conduct during the disciplinary hearing linked to the procurement of 17 vehicles intended for law enforcement and road safety operations.
Their dismissals followed allegations that the N$16 million tender for the vehicles had been improperly inflated. It was previously reported that the vehicles were allegedly purchased for about N$1.2 million each despite showroom prices of roughly N$800 000 at Windhoek dealerships.
Boois and Milinga argued that disciplinary findings against them were inconsistent and that evidence presented in their defence was ignored.
They further alleged that the RA interfered in the disciplinary process by pressuring chairperson Ileni Velikoshi to conclude the hearing within strict timelines imposed by the board’s human capital committee.
Correspondence seen by Namibian Sun at the time showed directives instructing the chairperson to finalise the hearing by 31 August 2025 and deliver judgment by 10 November 2025.
Katjipuka told Network Media Hub (NMH) at the time that this compromised the chairperson’s independence and resulted in a pressured and biased outcome.
The appeal also cited administrative failures, illness-related absences during proceedings and delays in the delivery of judgment, which the former executives claimed were later used to exert further influence over the process.
Katjipuka further challenged the findings of dishonesty against her clients, insisting the procurement process followed approved procedures and reasonable contractual interpretation.
Tjivikua argued that the matter did not satisfy the requirements for urgency and should instead proceed through labour dispute mechanisms.
At the time of the dismissals, Tjivikua said the disciplinary process had been conducted in line with the organisation’s governance framework and disciplinary procedures.
“The RA confirms that due process was followed in accordance with the organisation’s disciplinary procedures and governance framework,” he said in a media statement.
The authority declined to provide further details on the reasons for the disciplinary action, citing the rights and dignity of those involved.
