Windhoek: The Fishrot corruption trial is scheduled to resume on 09 March 2026, following a ruling by High Court Judge Marelize du Plessis.
According to Namibia Press Agency, in her judgment delivered on Wednesday, the judge rejected various applications by the suspects for further postponements, ordering the criminal proceedings to continue through 20 March 2026. The court sessions are set to begin at 10h00, effectively signalling an end to the procedural challenges that have stalled the case.
The Fishrot matter has been on the High Court roll since September 2021, although investigations were completed and arrests were made as far back as November 2019. The list of suspects includes former Justice Minister Sakeus Shanghala, former Fisheries Minister Bernhardt Esau, and former Investec Asset Management Managing Director James Hatuikulipi. Other accused individuals include Tamson Hatuikulipi, Pius Mwatelulo, former Fishcor CEO Mike Nghipunya, Ricardo Gustavo, Otneel Shuudifonya, Nigel Van Wyk, and Philipus Mwapopi.
Judge Du Plessis noted that the State, led by Deputy Prosecutor General Ed Marondedze, is prepared to call its first witness. While several defendants, including Gustavo, Esau, Tamson, Mwapopi, and Van Wyk, have expressed readiness for trial, others raised concerns regarding legal representation. James Hatuikulipi, Shanghala, and Mwatelulo, who are currently unrepresented, requested a delay to secure the counsel of their choice. Simultaneously, legal representatives for Nghipunya and Shuudifonya sought postponements ranging from 60 days to seven months to study the State's disclosure and prepare for trial.
In dismissing the majority of these applications, Judge Du Plessis emphasised that while the right to a fair trial is constitutionally protected, it does not provide an unlimited licence for delay. She specifically cited Article 12(1)(e) of the Namibian Constitution, ruling that the right to a legal practitioner of one's choice must be balanced against the broader interests of justice and the public need to finalise long-standing criminal matters.
Du Plessis further pointed to what she described as a pattern of conduct by some accused involving the filing of numerous applications in both criminal and civil courts.
'It is reasonable for a court to discern a pattern which establishes a delaying tactic,' the judge noted.
Consequently, only the applications by Nghipunya and Shuudifonya were partially granted to accommodate their lawyers' preparation time.