Nama and OvaHerero People Take Germany to Court

“We have repeatedly requested the German government to meet with us in order to resolve this issue through dialogue. However, the racist arrogant attitude of their representatives left us with no other choice but to seek legal redress through the US courts system.  We know it is going to be a long road to justice and we are very much prepared to sacrifice whatever it takes for our just cause” – Jefta Nguherimo, Vice-President, ONGI, Inc.


Press Release: First congress on Ovaherero and Nama genocides in Berlin

First congress focusing on the genocides against the Ovaherero and Nama in Berlin: Reconciliation requires readiness for dialogue and respect. Moving reception for Ovaherero and Nama delegates to the Berlin congress on their arrival in Windhoek, Namibia. A joint resolution of the congress delegates demands direct participation of the Ovaherero and Nama’s representatives in all Namibian-German negotiations on the genocide committed against their communities and global recognition of the first genocide of the 20th century.

Many exuberant supporters welcomed home Ovaherero and Nama delegates Tuesday (October 18, 2016) to Windhoek after the first transnational congress in Berlin under the theme “RESTORATIVE JUSTICE AFTER GENOCIDE“ highlighting the genocides committed between 1904-08. More than 50 Ovaherero and Nama delegates from Namibia, the United States, Canada, and Britain had come together in Berlin on the invitation of Berlin Postkolonial, AfricAvenir and the NGO alliance “Völkermord verjährt nicht!/No Amnesty on genocide!”. The Ovaherero Traditional Authority, Paramount Chief Adv. Vekuii Rukoro, invited all the Ovaherero to Okahandja this coming Sunday to report on the Berlin congress of last weekend.

During several addresses at the congress, two impressive rallies in central Berlin, a press conference organised by Niema Movassat, MP for DIE LINKE, and a work meeting with Bündnis 90/Die Grünen in the German parliament or Bundestag, representatives of the Ovaherero and Nama associations made absolutely clear that reconciliation can only be achieved provided they are directly and without any preconditions involved in the negotiations about the issue of genocide against their communities between the Namibian and German governments underway since 2014. They have emphasized that the two governments must recognise the relevant Namibian Parliament’s Resolution of 26th October, 2006, as the only valid and sound basis for the negotiations that must restart afresh with the Traditional Leaders of the Ovaherero and Nama Council on Genocide and Reparation, as well as guarantee the rights of the victim communities under international law.

In close co-operation with African, black and Germany-based non-governmental organisations critical of colonialism, Ovaherero and Nama delegates drew up a joint congress resolution which declares critical debate about the genocides a global task and a subject for society as a whole. Apart from the main demands for an official recognition of the genocides, a sincere apology by the German parlament and government and negotiations on reparations with the Ovaherero and Nama representatives from Namibia and their diaspora, calls were also made for critical observation of the demanded trialogue by non-government organisations (NGO).

Companies such as Deutsche Bank, Wecke & Voigts and Woermann that directly profited from the genocides and the forced labour of Ovaherero and Nama are urged to participate in compensating the affected communities who were entirely expropriated and forced to leave its lands. The congress resolution calls on the world’s nation states, the African Union, the United Nations and Christian churches, partly entangled in the genocides, to take the occasion of the ongoing UN Decade for People of African Descent and officially recognise the Ovaherero and Nama genocides as well as to support the victims’ just struggle for an apology and direct participation in the exclusive government negotiations.
During the next days, the congress resolution will be sent to the German and Namibian governments, to the U.N., to political parties, involved companies and to the Christian churches. According to the Berlin-based Herero Israel Kaunatjike of the alliance „No Amnesty on Genocide!” the congress is a “key step towards expanding the decades-long fight for justice”.

During last year’s allied campaign, “Genocide is Genocide!”, over 50 NGO and 150 prominent figures in politics and academia in Germany had already lent their support to the demands of the Ovaherero and Nama for direct participation in the negotiations on the genocide issue.
Heidemarie Wieczorek-Zeul (SPD), the former Development Minister, sent a greeting with a call for “moral and financial compensation” of the Ovaherero and Nama to the congress in Berlin. Ruprecht Polenz (CDU), the German government’s special representative, was invited to the congress but declined to take part in a panel discussion with the Ovaherero and Nama representatives or to meet the delegation during their stay in Berlin.

Contact: Israel Kaunatjike, Bündnis „Völkermord verjährt nicht!“, 0049-173-1035605 & Christian Kopp, Berlin Postkolonial, 0049-179-9100 976,
Attachments: Berlin Congress Resolution
Photos by:
J. Nguherimo (congress on 14./15.10. in Berlin’s Centre Francais de Berlin):<a
O. Feldhaus (March on 16.10.):
J. Zeller (March on 16.10.):
B. Sauer-Diete (13.10. Protest outside DHM & March on 16.10.):
More information on:

Open Letter to: The Special Envoys ……

In an Open Letter to the special envoys Mr. Polenz and Dr. Ngavirue, Konrad-Adenauer Foundation, and the Namibia Institute for Democracy, Mr. Festus Muundjua, a descendant of the 1904-1908 genocides victims, calls the ongoing negotiations between the German and Namibian a charade and an attempt to deceive the Namibian people and deny justice to the descendants of victims of the Ovaherero and Nama genocides. Mr. Muundjua cites the existence of a secret agreement between the German and Namibian governments that Germany does not have to pay reparations.


Do they want to top it all by mocking us?

Human remains of former colonised people are still considered as objects of research in the German museums that currently hold them. This state of affairs is unbearable for Mnyaka Sururu Mboro and Christian Kopp, working for the organisation Berlin Postkolonial.

Right before Mnyaka Sururu Mboro flew to Germany for the first time in 1978, his grandmother had requested him to bring the head of Mangi Meli back to Tanzania. Mangi Meli was one of many anti-colonial resistant fighters who were killed by the German colonisers. Forty years later, the co-founder of the organisation Berlin Postkolonial and his colleague Christian Kopp are still asking for the return of thousands of remains of colonised people home and calling for a concrete acknowledgement of Germany’s colonial past and racist legacy.

Christian Kopp: Mboro, you have been advocating a critical perspective on colonialism and its legacy for a few decades now. Among other debates, you have actively campaigned for renaming streets of Berlin which still honour former colonial criminals and you guide educational city tours that unveil the postcolonial traces of the German capital. Where do you draw your motivation from?

Mnyaka Sururu Mboro: I have experienced British occupation in the Tanganyika region and the ensuing independence movement. My grandmothers also told me a lot on the German foreign occupation before 1918. Many evening stories were dedicated to Hermann Wissman’s military expeditions as Imperial Commissioner, to mkono wa damu, the “bloody hands” of Carl Peters, but also to the famous resistance of Mangi Meli, leader of the Wachagga people living on the Kilimanjaro. These things are deeply engraved. And when you find yourself in Berlin, and you see that there are still two “Wissmanstraßen” (Wissman Streets) and one “Petersallee” (Peters Avenue), and that this very colonial city does not seem to acknowledge its racist and oppressive legacy, then you tell yourself that you might obviously be one of the only ones here who could shed light upon this history and the pervasive forms of colonial oppression: forced labour, boycott, violent beatings, wars and uprisings, and the demonization of our cultures and spiritual beliefs by Christian missionaries. This work is essential, and therefore natural to me. What about you? What could have possibly motivated you as a white German during all those years?

Christian Kopp: Despite having studied history, I have only found out about our entangled colonial histories by discussing with you and other Tanzanian people more than ten years after graduating. It was not so hard to understand that this violent past, which is typically repressed, divides us more than it brings us closer. You made me realise that my personal engagement with the past may help to bridge this abyss between us. Since then I have critically reflected on Germany’s colonial past and I have supported initiatives lead by the descendants of colonised people for symbolic acknowledgements and material reparations. The scandalous situation of human remains from former colonies appears to me as the most urgent issue in that process. But you’ve even got a personal connection to the debate…

Mnyaka Sururu Mboro: Well, no doubt about that! When my grandmother heard that I was going to Germany, she made me promise that I would search for the remains of Mangi Meli and see to it that his head is ultimately repatriated to Tanzania. Meli and eighteen of his followers were hanged in March 1900 by German soldiers. Wachagga people are certain that his head was then severed and shipped to Germany. To us, who will all later be inhumed on our original land close to our kin, it is unbearable to know that his head could never be buried, particularly because the heads of the dead play a special role in our burials: they are always turned towards the Kibo, the highest summit of Mount Kilimanjaro. After a year, the skulls of the fathers are then dug up and reburied under the holy tree Isale after a sacred ceremony.

The search for Meli’s head started in the sixties; Wachagga, and particularly Meli’s direct descendants, already tried to locate it in Germany back then. Many believe that the complete evaporation of traces of its existence has been the cause for every misfortune that has descended upon the community ever since. A new request has recently been sent to the Foundation Prussian Cultural Heritage in Berlin. Do you find such a relentless dedication hard to understand?

Christian Kopp: Not one bit. I wouldn’t either accept that the remains of my ancestors be stored forever in a cardboard box on the other side of the planet! I can fully grasp the desire for descendants to welcome their ancestors back home and bury them with dignity, especially when those remains were sent to Europe to support racist scientific research. Just like the children of Meli’s children would like to witness his return, Timothy Frederick recently demanded the return of his forefather Cornelius Fredericks to the Nama community in Namibia in an eloquent intervention in Berlin in July 2015. This renowned leader of the Oorlam resistance against German colonial rule was indeed sent to a concentration camp on Shark Island in the Lüderitz Bay where he died in 1907. According to Nama oral history, his body was later decapitated.

Mnyaka Sururu Mboro: The remains of prominent anti-colonial leaders obviously have a deep political, cultural and spiritual significance for the respective communities – it was precisely often for this reason that some were shipped away. The most famous example was the story of Mkwawa’s head: he was killed in 1898 in former German East-Africa and his head was displayed by German colonists as the symbol for the crushed anti-colonial rebellion of the Wahehe, and later examined by famous anatomist Rudolph Virchow in Berlin. The return of his skull was part of the terms of the 1919 Versailles Treaty, but it was only repatriated to Tanzania in 1954. The remains of his father and the skull of his son, who was likewise killed by the German colonial troops, are still in Berlin as far as I know.

Christian Kopp: The archives of the Berlin Ethnological Museum suggest it indeed, and it is inexcusable that those responsible for the collections have not actively sought for those remains. When one realises the whole bustle that is made around the remains of Catholic Saints, or those of Prussian monarchs such as Frederic William I and Frederic the Great, whose remains were hid by the Nazis from the Allies, it seems unbelievable to me that people in Germany do not understand the importance of a restitution for the Mkwawa family and for the Wahehe in general.

Besides the remains of less-known and unidentified individuals acquired during the colonial era should also be proactively offered for restitution when their origins are known. In other words, the initiative should come from the museums themselves, instead of the usual reaction to repatriation claims. This would ensure that respect is given to the descendants who, as a rule, cannot know where the skeletal remains of their ancestors are presently housed. Other western countries such as the U.S. have repatriated soldiers who fell in the wars of the twentieth century in a monumental manner. For all that, if, in the case of unknown remains, the referencing and provenancing work leads to nothing more precise than their broad African origin, I would suggest that the African community in Germany be approached so that appropriate burials can be carried out with respect for the dignity of the dead.

Mnyaka Sururu Mboro: I am afraid, we are still far from this. One of the main reasons seems to be that only New Zealand, Australia and Namibia have made Germany to return human remains but most other governments – and among them the government of the United Republic of Tanzania we have informed about the matter – are nowhere near to stand up for the rights of the descendants and of the source communities. The statements emanating from German museums also show that they still consider themselves as the rightful owners of our ancestors. They emphasise that only the mere single cases which clearly indicate a “context of injustice” can be subjected to negotiations for their return. The right of being able to define a “context of injustice” is however withheld by those institutions, which maintain that a context of colonial occupation cannot be considered as such in principle. What are they telling us? That our ancestors might have sold or given the remains of their relatives of their own free will? Do they want to top it all by mocking us?

Christian Kopp: I fear that there is even more at stake for European museums than the simple question of housing those human remains. The collections were used for racist theories in anthropology. In other words, not only were they acquired in the context of colonial oppression, they also justified an extremely unethical scientific agenda whose apex came only a few decades later: The selection and extermination of Jewish people for “scientific research”, aiming at the completion of German anthropological collections. Therefor I am shocked when I hear nowadays of the alleged precious worthiness of those remains for the greater good and humanitarian scientific knowledge. It is not only inconsistent with the lack of appropriate archival material on these collections which has resulted from decades of neglect and indifference. This argument supports a model in which white German scientists deliberately continue studying the skeletal remains of colonised African people and other People of Color and look at them as mere “research material”– this is abusive.


Mnyaka Sururu Mboro is a teacher and a board member of Berlin Postkolonial. Christian Kopp is historian and board member of the same organisation. They are currently organising a conference for the educational project “Just Listen – Globalgeschichte von unten und zivilgesellschaftlicher Dialog” (“Global history from below and dialogue in civil society”) which will focus on the central position of the views and voices of colonised people and their descendants in the debate about human remains and sacred cultural objects in white museum collections. The conference will take place in Autumn 2017.



Ambassador Undermines Genocides Motions

Namibia’s Ambassador Undermines Ovaherero and Nama Genocides Motions in the Bundestag

On March 14, 2016, the Namibian ambassador to Germany, apparently acting at the behest of the German federal government, wrote a letter appealing to Left and Green parties to withdraw their motions on the Ovaherero and Nama genocides. The motions by the Green and Left parties represent an attempt by German parliamentarians to provide a measure of justice for the victims of the Ovaherero and Nama genocides of 1904-1908. This is something that generations of descendants of these genocides have been seeking and actively campaigning for since Namibia’s independence in 1990. The motions recognize the genocides, include an apology and restitution for the victims and their descendants, and call for the involvement of the affected communities in the dialogue to resolve these issues. The affected communities welcome and supported these motions. While the Green Party’s motion was withdrawn prior to the debate, the Left Party motion was debated and voted down on March 16, 2016 ‒ a victory for the ambassador and the German federal government and a loss for the victims of the genocides.

The Left Party motion is one of the most detailed and comprehensive public documents by any party or government entity, including the Namibian government. Here are some of its most notable elements: supports the 26 October 2006 Namibian National Assembly resolution; requires the involvement of affected people in negotiations; recognizes need for restorative justice for victims that is separate from bilateral aid; recognizes the continued impact of expulsion from and appropriation of land and calls for mechanisms to address resultant structural imbalances; proposes a structural compensation fund to help address land issues and lack of infrastructure; holds accountable those businesses that benefited from labor, expulsion, and land appropriation; calls for educational and cultural exchanges; and calls for the return of stolen property and human remains. While I can imagine that the German federal government might disagree with some of these elements ‒ after all, it has not put forth its own motion ‒ it is hard to imagine which of these the Namibian government should find objectionable, especially given that the offspring of the victims welcome these proposals.

In his letter to the Bundestag the ambassador proposed that these motions should be replaced by a new and unknown motion to be produced shortly by the two governments, and a multi-party motion that would be guided by agreed-upon proposals of the Namibian and German governments that have not been made public by either government. Further, the Namibian government continues to refuse to involve affected communities and civic society. The ambassador talks of “Harambee” with the German federal government while engendering ohani (divisions) in Namibia. Not only does the Namibian ambassador appear to speak on behalf of the German government, he also seems to be telling the parliamentarians that the Namibian government, in working with its German counterpart, can deliver a better deal for Germany – likely one that does not go as far as the Left Party has proposed. The ambassador’s letter is essentially saying trust us to work with your government to protect Germany’s interests just as we have protected property rights after independence. What about the interests of the affected communities and individuals, Mr. Ambassador? One can only guess that the ambassador is referring to, among other things, policies such as the disastrous Willing Seller Willing Buyer (perhaps better referred to as Unwilling Seller, Unable Buyer policy, since many farm owners are unwilling to sell, and the disenfranchised cannot afford to buy). This is also the policy that enshrined the imbalances referenced in the Left Party motion, imbalances resulting from the Kaiser’s expropriation of land.

Clearly the German federal government’s moral and political calculations have evolved over the past couple of years due to efforts of the affected communities as well as of individuals, parliamentarians, and NGOs in Germany and all over the world. Reportedly, the German federal government is prepared to offer an apology, but they want the apology to be done correctly and to be accepted. Presumably, the soon to be produced multi-party motion by the two governments would pave the way for such an outcome. Furthermore, given the ambassador’s letter and the Namibian government’s refusal to engage the affected communities, the thinking must be that the Namibian Cabinet or National Assembly would accept the apology and absolve the German federal government of any future moral and legal responsibility. Such an apology will be morally hollow, will not be acceptable, and cannot lead to forgiveness and healing on the part of the victims. In fact, descendants will be left with a continued feeling of victimization by the German federal government, albeit with the acquiescence of the government of a free Namibia.

International conventions, Namibia’s constitution, and Namibia’s National Assembly resolution of 2016 all recognize and protect the rights of groups and individuals affected by genocide and crimes against humanity to seek appropriate legal and moral recourse and to speak for and represent themselves. Even the German federal government recognizes that the lack of involvement could be a significant hindrance in making limited progress. What is unbelievable and supremely immoral is that the Namibian government is essentially preventing progress on this issue by refusing to involve descendants in any possible outcome.

The victims of the genocides are scattered across the globe. They are in Botswana, South Africa, and Angola where their fore-bearers sought refuge. If their representatives are not involved in these negotiations, does the Namibian Government claim to negotiate on their behalf as well? This is an important issue because the Namibian Government continues to deny the descendants of the victims of genocides their right to return to their ancestral land. Those who dare to return to Namibia follow the same procedures as other emigrants and are eventually given citizenship by registration, which can be revoked at any time.

In a democracy, government protects and cherishes these rights. It is incumbent upon people of good conscience all over the world to remind governments of this sacred responsibility. It is equally important for the descendants of the OvaHerero and Nama genocides to speak up and demand that their government listens to them, protects them, and certainly not stand in the way of justice for them.

This is not a political issue; it is at its core a moral issue, and a moral test for the German federal government – can they do this right, and for the right reason?

To survivors of genocides and their descendants, genocide is and continues to be an existential issue. We live with it, and its memory haunts us. Efforts to deny, undermine, dismiss or whitewash our horror are painful and threatening and are seen as congruent with past efforts to deny us our humanity and basic rights, including the right to live. And, as our forbearers (including Kahimemua, Witbooi, and Rapote) did, and as our children and grandchildren expect us, we will continue to insist on justice – we have to.

Namibia is blessed with individuals of great courage and moral rectitude, from all walks of life and ethnicities and across the political spectrum. Many have publicly spoken with moral clarity on this issue; others do so privately, and just as forcefully. With the support of the Namibian community and friends all over the world, descendants of the genocide victims are resolute and united in their search for justice. This is what gives me hope that there will be a course correction and that the activities of the Namibian ambassador to Germany will go down in the annals of history as an unfortunate anomaly.

Dr. Kavemuii Murangi is a Namibian born educator currently residing in the USA.  He is a descendant of the victims of the Ovaherero genocide and the founding director of the USA based OvaHerero, Mbanderu and Nama Genocide(s) Institute (ONGI) –; @ONGI1904

Ambassador attempts to suppress genocide motions

The Namibian government is trying to suppress Ovaherero and Nama genocide motions in the Bundestag. The motions recognize the Ovaherero and Nama genocides of 1904-1908, call for an apology and restitution to the descendants of the genocides, and are welcomed and supported by the Ovaherero and Nama people. In a surprising letter (see attached statement) to the Bundestag, on the eve of the Bundestag debate on March 17, the Namibian Ambassador to Germany proposed that the motions be replaced by a new motion based on ongoing secretive negotiations between the German and the Namibian governments. To date the Namibian government has refused to directly involve the descendants of the genocide in these negotiations.  It appears the Namibian government is siding with the German government and protecting German interest in this matter, against the interest of its own people – the victims of the Ovaherero and Nama genocides and their descendants.  Needless to say, reconciliation and healing is not possible without the direct involvement of the descendants of the genocide, without a meaningful apology and restitution to the descendants.

While the Green Party has withdrawn its motion, the Left Party is standing firm with the Ovaherero and Nama people, is not withdrawing its motion, and has issued a statement calling on the governments to end these secretive talks.