By Mustafa Fetouri, Libyan academic, award winning journalist and analyst
By Mustafa Fetouri, Libyan academic, award winning journalist and analyst
The deep physical and structural wounds inflicted on the African continent by European colonialism will take generations to heal – if they ever heal at all. In today’s fast-moving geopolitical landscape, where crises like illegal migration, economic turbulence, and regional conflict dominate African headline news, the question of historical justice is often forced onto the back burner. Yet, through continental efforts, Africa refuses to let the issue recede into memory.
The landmark Algiers Declaration, adopted last December under the auspices of the African Union, marked a shift from moral grievance to a legal strategy, demanding the codification of colonial atrocities as crimes against humanity and establishing that justice requires binding legal reparations, not voluntary Western aid usually publicized as gifts.
This week, that continental demand for accountability finds its most vivid expression in Namibia. On August 23, the Herero and Nama people gathered in the historic town of Okahandja in central Namibia, just 70 kilometers north of the capital, Windhoek, for the annual Herero Day (Red Flag Day) commemorations. The event honors Chief Samuel Maharero, leader of the Herero resistance against German rule. After he died in exile in Botswana, his body was returned to Namibia and reburied in Okahandja in 1923.
The march through the ancestral burial grounds of the paramount chiefs stands as an active protest against modern colonial evasion – and a direct challenge to a European power attempting to settle a multi-century blood debt on its own convenient, unilateral terms.
To understand the full weight of this grievance, one must return to 1904, when Imperial German colonial forces unleashed a systematic campaign of destruction following an indigenous uprising against relentless land dispossession and colonial tyranny. In October 1904, German General Lothar von Trotha issued his notorious ‘Vernichtungsbefehl’ (extermination order), explicitly declaring: “Within the German borders, every Herero, with or without a gun... will be shot.”
Far from facing criminal prosecution, von Trotha was long celebrated as a hero at home – a street in Munich bore his name until public pressure finally forced the city council to rename it ‘Hererostrasse’ in 2006.
Under his command, German troops drove tens of thousands of Herero families into the hyper-arid Omaheke Desert in eastern Namibia, systematically poisoning and sealing off water wells to ensure death by thirst and starvation. Those who survived, along with the Nama people who rebelled shortly afterward, were swept into concentration camps (most notoriously at Shark Island) where they faced forced labor, lethal living conditions, and pseudoscientific racial experiments.
By the time the campaign ended in 1908, it had claimed an estimated 70,000 lives, systematically wiping out 80% of the Herero population and 50% of the Nama population in what historians and legal scholars recognize as the 20th century’s first genocide.
Yet, when confronting the modern reckoning for these atrocities, Imperial Germany’s successor state has constructed a masterclass in diplomatic and legal evasion. In May 2021, after six years of closed-door bilateral negotiations, Berlin and Windhoek initialed a joint declaration in which Germany acknowledged the atrocities as “genocide from today’s perspective” – a carefully calculated semantic formula designed specifically to avoid admitting legal liability under international law. Rather than offering legally binding reparations, Berlin committed €1.1 billion over 30 years earmarked for state-level development projects, framing the financial support strictly as a voluntary gesture of reconciliation.
The contrast with Germany’s handling of European historical crimes could not be more glaring. In the aftermath of World War II, Germany recognized direct legal liability for the Holocaust, paying tens of billions of euros in formal reparations directly to survivors and representative organizations – commitments that continue to this day. When dealing with African victims, however, Berlin invoked intertemporal legal loopholes, arguing that international law against genocide did not exist in 1904. By bypassing the Herero and Nama leaders to cut a state-to-state deal, Germany sought to buy immunity from future legal claims. This double standard is precisely why affected communities rejected the 2021 agreement.
Two years later, traditional leaders from the Ovaherero Traditional Authority (OTA) and the Nama Traditional Leaders Association (NTLA), representing the direct descendants of the victims, launched a legal challenge in the Namibian High Court to invalidate the 2021 Joint Declaration. They argue that by excluding affected indigenous communities from negotiations, the Namibian government breached its duty to protect its citizens’ rights and heritage.
The resulting political impasse has paralyzed parliamentary ratification in Windhoek, while opposition lawmakers in Berlin increasingly view the agreement as a diplomatic liability. By challenging a deal struck over their heads, the Herero and Nama are establishing a critical precedent: Sovereign states cannot settle the blood debt of indigenous genocide without the direct inclusion and consent of the victim communities themselves.
This domestic legal battle has become the focal point of a broader international legal push. In August 2026, Amnesty International officially filed court papers in the Namibian High Court seeking to join the Herero and Nama litigation as ‘amicus curiae’. Amnesty’s legal intervention targets a fundamental principle: State-to-state development packages cannot override the recognized rights of indigenous communities under international law to seek direct, full reparations for genocide. Former European powers have long shielded themselves behind the principle of non-retroactivity, claiming that atrocities committed prior to the 1948 Genocide Convention fall outside modern judicial frameworks. However, joint efforts between the African Union and the Caribbean Community (CARICOM) are systematically dismantling this defense.
Germany’s refusal to accept legal liability in Namibia is thus exposed as a deliberate attempt to preserve a legal shield protecting ex-empires from reparatory claims.
As the African Union moves to codify colonial atrocities into international law, the ongoing High Court challenge in Windhoek serves as a test case for former colonial powers across the West. Until Berlin meets its obligations with the same legal and financial rigor applied to European historical crimes, the solemn gatherings in Okahandja will stand as an active front line in the global struggle against impunity.
The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.
© Autonomous Nonprofit Organization “TV-Novosti”, 2005–2026. All rights reserved.
This website uses cookies. Read RT Privacy policy to find out more.