A national authority for Namibia’s film and media

Namibia’s film, television, radio and online media carry competing responsibilities: protecting public trust, widening access to local stories and supporting creative work. A proposed national film and media authority would give those responsibilities a clearer institutional home. It could coordinate policy, strengthen local production and help the public exercise its rights without placing creative decisions in the hands of a single government office.

The Popular Democratic Movement’s policy should be read as a democratic and developmental compact. The authority would enable government to set transparent rules and provide predictable support while preserving editorial independence, due process and public scrutiny. Its central task would be to make the media ecosystem more representative of Namibia, especially when commercial markets leave smaller languages, rural audiences and less profitable subjects on the margins.

Why a national authority is needed

A national authority is useful only if it clarifies who makes media policy, who receives public support and how complaints are handled. Namibia’s democratic commitments require institutions that can resist political pressure, disclose conflicts of interest and act consistently across film, television, radio and digital platforms. Clear mandates and published procedures would also help professional journalists, producers and civil society organisations understand their rights and obligations.

Film has direct developmental value through tourism, education, employment and the preservation of living culture. A predictable framework can turn scattered projects into a sustainable creative economy, attract co-production partners and give local suppliers access to contracts. The policy therefore treats media as infrastructure for national development rather than as a commercial sector alone, while ensuring that public money creates lasting skills, archives and audiences.

Australian comparisons need care, but they show the benefit of separating policy support from political control. Sydney and Melbourne have developed strong screen industries, major festivals and specialised production services. Their growth was supported by stable institutions and screen agencies rather than by one office directing every editorial choice. For Namibia, the lesson is to build capable local institutions while protecting the pluralism that makes cultural production credible.

Independence, powers and public accountability

The authority should be created by law as an independent statutory body, with a board chosen through an open, merit-based process that includes filmmakers, journalists, linguists, educators, technology specialists and representatives of marginalised communities. Fixed terms, protected budgets, public declarations of interests and a clear appeals process would limit patronage. Ministers should set broad legislative goals, while the board handles operational decisions and must explain them in public.

PDM’s policy documents provide the broader democratic and social framework against which such a body should operate. Any enabling law should translate broad commitments into measurable duties: promote Namibian content, protect editorial independence, coordinate public funding, collect and publish market data, and report on who benefits from media support. This makes the proposal auditable and allows Parliament, journalists and the public to distinguish a practical mandate from a rhetorical promise.

Regulation, funding and public broadcasting should remain distinguishable. The authority could establish industry standards and licensing rules, a public broadcaster could commission programmes, and an independent classifier could assess age suitability and other content concerns. Australia separates many of these functions through agencies such as the Australian Classification Board, Screen Australia, the ABC and SBS. Namibia does not need to copy that structure, but it does need similarly clear boundaries between public money, programme judgement and enforcement.

Local stories and cultural identity

National media policy is also cultural policy. A catalogue funded for Namibia’s audiences should reflect communities from the Zambezi and Kunene regions, the country’s urban centres and its diverse linguistic communities. This means commissioning in widely used local languages, training presenters and editors in those languages, and requiring sound, subtitles and accessible formats where audiences need them. Representation should be judged by creative participation and finished work rather than by a quota on paper.

The authority can also support cultural preservation without turning tradition into a government message. Digitised films, oral histories, music recordings and news archives should be held under clear ownership and usage rules, with consent from contributors and benefit-sharing where appropriate. National standards for archives, intellectual property and ethical production would help local creators negotiate with international distributors while retaining control of their material and the right to correct inaccurate uses.

Public memory provides a sensitive test of how an authority earns trust. International reporting on the El Olimpo case, for example, concerns an official refusal to honour victims of a clandestine centre and the civic struggle over recognition. The precise legal setting is foreign to Namibia, yet the democratic issue is relevant: institutions should document difficult histories, explain refusals and avoid erasing victims through opaque decisions. Transparent evidence and public reasoning matter more than celebratory symbolism.

Financing and growing the production pipeline

Funding is the practical hinge between an ambitious film policy and work that reaches cinemas, television and streaming audiences. PDM’s developmental approach supports predictable grants, concessional finance, tax relief for qualifying production and public procurement. A dedicated media levy or a share of broadcasting and streaming revenue could supplement those sources, provided the mechanism is simple, transparent and protected from short-term political spending. Every grant should carry a public benefit condition and publish its recipient and purpose.

Digital distribution should be part of the plan from the beginning. Many viewers encounter news and entertainment through mobile screens, social video and global streaming services rather than scheduled television. Australia’s combination of local subscription platforms, multinational catalogues and fast-moving YouTube creators demonstrates how audiences divide their attention between local and imported material. Namibian rules can encourage local availability, fair revenue arrangements and discoverable metadata without attempting to reproduce a much larger market’s economics.

Support should follow a project from script to audience. The authority could maintain a plain-language production guide, offer applications for development finance, introduce a producer database and coordinate permits, studios, laboratories and accredited post-production. Small firms often lose time simply finding reliable facilities. Regional production hubs, shared equipment and standard digital workflows would spread activity beyond Windhoek, while an open review process would keep assistance from becoming a closed network of familiar applicants.

Skills, access and regional participation

Skills policy must cover the whole chain from classroom to newsroom and film set. Scholarships and apprenticeships in screenwriting, cinematography, sound, editing, fact-checking and digital storytelling should be linked to recognised qualifications and actual placements. The PDM’s teacher training proposals offer a relevant principle: professional development works better when it is sustained, practical and connected to retention rather than delivered as a one-off workshop. Media education needs the same continuity, with teachers equipped to assess sources and students given access to production tools.

Access also includes people who are not fluent in dominant languages or do not have fast broadband. Community screenings linked to radio simulcasts, downloadable programmes and scheduled television can reach audiences that streaming-first strategies overlook. Captions, sign-language interpretation, audio description and high-contrast design should become standard in public-funded productions. The authority can publish audience research by region, language, disability and age so that access gaps are visible and funding can respond to measured need.

Australian community media offers a useful practical reference. Indigenous screen organisations, community radio stations, libraries and local festivals combine professional production with local knowledge, often hosting a screening and discussion with cast or crew afterwards. Such events reflect a familiar Australian custom of evaluating media collectively over tea rather than treating a film as a purely commercial transaction. Namibian town halls, school screenings and mobile cinema tours could adapt that spirit to questions of language, identity and accountability.

Participation, oversight and implementation

Transparency must be built into the authority’s daily operation and leadership appointments. It should publish an annual report, grant register, audience data, complaints outcomes, production statistics and a clear explanation of its revenue. Board minutes, policy consultations and conflict-of-interest records should be accessible in readable formats. Independent audits every few years would test whether public funds improved access, skills and local production rather than simply increasing the number of projects announced.

Implementation should move in phases so that new institutions do not duplicate existing work or exclude capable organisations. An initial phase can map regulation, public funding, archives and industry needs; the next can launch shared services and pilot funds; a later phase can evaluate results before expanding the model. Legislative amendments should close enforcement gaps, and a parliamentary committee should review the authority publicly. This sequence makes the policy adaptable while preserving clear lines of responsibility.

Public participation is part of democratic media governance. Citizens, filmmakers, journalists, schools, disability groups, broadcasters and the PDM Youth League can submit evidence, attend consultations and propose priority programmes through the party’s official channels. Feedback should receive published responses, explaining which recommendations were accepted and why others were declined. The authority’s credibility will depend on regular contact with the public, accessible complaint routes and evidence that policy decisions change as communities gain a stronger voice.