The alarming shortage of serving judges in Namibia is emerging as a national crisis. Several events illustrate the scale of the problem. First, a High Court judge made unprecedented remarks on the issue in court. Two days later, the Chief Justice included reference to the crisis in his speech opening the 2026 ‘legal year’. In response to both, questions will be asked in Parliament later this week, to establish what the government plans to do about it. Between them, these developments make clear the serious shortage of judges on the Namibian bench and its potential impact on the country, as well as on the judges themselves.
***
Judges in Namibia have to meet exacting benchmarks with specified deadlines for managing cases and delivering judgments. But there are too few judges to do the work.
Earlier this month, at the opening of the 2026 legal year, Namibia’s Chief Justice, Peter Sam Shivute, said the shortage of judicial officers ‘has reached a critical point’. The recent retirement of two Supreme Court justices as well as two judges of the High Court meant there was a ‘particularly dire’ shortage of judges for civil matters.
To illustrate ‘the gravity of the situation’, he said just one judge must handle all civil matters in Namibia’s Northern Local Division. Between 2024 and 2025 the workload of each judge increased by nearly 60%. Judges are thus carrying ‘significantly heavier caseloads’ to ensure courts function properly and to stop the accumulation of backlogs.
The CJ spoke of the ‘immense and sustained pressure’ on judges and court staff, showing an urgent need for more judges so that ‘timely, effective and resilient’ standards can be maintained.
Magistrates’ workloads also ‘unsustainable’
It’s not just the higher courts, said the Chief Justice. Magistrates’ courts are also facing a significant increase in cases and, coupled with the ‘persistent shortages of magistrates’, this is resulting in ‘unsustainable caseloads’ for these judicial officers too.
It’s a problem in other jurisdictions too, like South Africa, but judges rarely speak out about it, in court or elsewhere. In Namibia though, just days before the CJ’s speech, there was a real-life example of the stress under which judges operate, seen via an extraordinary court order issued in the High Court’s main division (Windhoek).
After an acting appointment, Judge Beatrix de Jager became a permanent judge in June 2024. Like all other judges, her workload would have increased by about 60% in that time.
She had set 3 February as the date on which to deliver judgment in a civil case. Under Namibia’s rules for the managing of cases, judges may not postpone matters for judgment without setting a fixed date for delivery. (In many countries, South Africa for example, it’s routine for a judge, at the end of a hearing, to adjourn matters to an unspecified day for a decision.)
Judges obliged to explain if deadline not met
But when 3 February arrived, and representatives of the 50 parties involved were in court to hear what she had decided, Judge de Jager explained that she was postponing her delivery of the decision.
According to Namibia’s practice directives, she was then obliged to explain why she wasn’t delivering the decision on the day she had indicated, but would deliver on 17 March instead.
She could have issued a vague explanation, simply saying that the judgment wasn’t yet completed. Instead, in a short but devastating paragraph she explained exactly why it wasn’t yet done.
‘Inhuman’ expectations of judges
This is what she wrote:
As required by practice direction 61(2), the reason for not delivering judgment today is as follows:
‘Today is the thirteenth court day since I am back from leave (which was part of the court recess) and for 2026 I have, to date, delivered five judgments, two judgments are with the proofreaders and another will be submitted for proofreading today or tomorrow. Thus, for 2026, I have, to date, written eight judgments. A day has twenty four hours. I am a human. The system’s expectations, which, to date, have provided no relief despite the current unreasonable workload brought about by the crises workforce shortage, is inhuman. Something must change drastically. For the time being there is no change. The result is that something has got to give. I choose it not to be me any more at the cost of my personal health.’
Reaction was swift. In the National Assembly, Job Shiululo Amupanda said he would be taking up the matter. In his official Notice of Question, he said that, in the wake of De Jager’s court order, he would be asking six detailed questions of the Minister of Justice and Labour Relations, Fillemon Wise Immanuel. The formal notice indicates he will ask these questions in Parliament on Thursday 18 February.
Was the judge ‘on strike’?
His questions come against the background of a go-slow by Namibian magistrates late last year, the continuing impact of their action, the still unresolved issues they raised and the Minister’s characterisation of the magistrates’ action as unlawful.
He wants to know the Minister’s assessment of the concerns about workload, staffing and judicial welfare raised by the judge. Does the minister consider Judge de Jager ‘on strike’? What is the Judicial Service Commission’s view of her court order? What specific measures and mechanisms does the JSC have in place to address the mental health and well-being of judicial officers?
His other questions probe these and related issues more deeply, asking for an update on the magistrates’ ‘strike’, what steps are being taken to address ‘unsustainable’ workloads and whether the Minister plans to advise the President to establish an inquiry into ‘the state of Namibia’s justice system’.
All of society affected if judges can’t cope
Outside Parliament, there’s also been discussion about whether the judge’s court order. Many support her comments, though some have said her approach was perhaps confrontational and she should have acted more ‘judicially’.
In my reading though, her comments strongly suggest she has tried other ways to resolve the situation, but that nothing changed.
The Chief Justice is clearly aware of the growing crisis. In his speech he said that a judiciary ‘weakened by lack of capacity’, affected every sector of society, economic confidence, investment, social stability and ordinary citizens who need timely and effective resolution of disputes. ‘This is not a challenge for the judiciary alone. It affects us all.’
That view is shared by experts quoted in Namibia’s weekend newspapers, with warnings by, for example, a former Cabinet Minister, Calle Schlettwein, who told The Namibian that delays in the judicial system could damage the economy and ultimately lead to investors leaving the country.
Schlettwein, who previously held the position of Minister of Finance and of Trade and Industry, said a slow justice system, caused by the ‘underfunding of the judiciary’ and a drop in the rate of appeals, would negatively impact investments. These problems would ‘undermine the common good and the economy,’ he said.
Namibia’s choice now: more judges or go back to big delays
It seems Namibia has a choice: find extra funding to ensure judges can work optimally, or change the rules and allow longer delays in delivering decisions, with attendant economic results.
The country has already seen the result of the latter approach: There was a lengthy period, about 10 years ago, when deadlines were far more flexible and certain judges fell shockingly far behind.
Perhaps the worst offender was Chief Justice Shivute, whose decisions were sometimes handed down 10 years after a matter was argued. Though he was not the only one responsible for lengthy delays, the fact that the most senior judge in the country was sitting with such a serious backlog meant it was extremely difficult for any action to be taken in relation to any of the other judges behind with their work.
Since then, the judicial leadership appears to have taken a firm decision to hold judges to a stricter deadline system and clear lines of oversight.
The legal community, and the public – even judges themselves – can see the positive impact of the tighter timelines, but without enough people on the bench, the standards now in place, and the pressure put on the judiciary, are between them becoming, as Judge de Jager put it, inhuman.
Chief Justice opens 2026 legal year
DJP Court Order(Motion – General (High Court – MD)) (approved with seal) (47) (2)
NOTICE- Judge De Jager _260210_154410 (1)
- Written on 15 February 2026