NAMIBIAN investor in oil and gas, Knowledge Katti, has voiced support for the establishment of the Upstream Petroleum Unit (UPU) in the Office of the President and the Petroleum Amendment Bill currently before Parliament, arguing that the reforms are necessary to strengthen oversight, attract investment, and accelerate Namibia’s transition from oil discoveries to production. In a memorandum addressed to parliamentarians and national leadership, Katti said the reforms reflect a “deliberate, evidence-based response” to institutional challenges within the petroleum sector and urged lawmakers to support the bill while ensuring accountability measures are strengthened.
Full statement reads as follows:
In Support of the Upstream Petroleum Unit and the Petroleum Amendment Bill — A Case for Bold, Purposeful Reform
As a Namibian investor with years of direct involvement in attracting capital to our upstream petroleum sector — engaging international partners, facilitating exploration discussions, and witnessing first-hand the friction points that have slowed our national progress — I write this memorandum not as a partisan voice, but as a concerned and invested stakeholder in our country’s future. My intent is to contribute constructively to what has become an important national debate, and to respectfully appeal to our esteemed parliamentarians and country leadership to weigh this issue with the gravity and nuance it deserves.
The establishment of the Upstream Petroleum Unit (UPU) within the Office of the President, and the Petroleum Amendment Bill currently before Parliament, have generated criticism from various quarters. Some of that criticism reflects legitimate governance concerns worthy of careful scrutiny. However, much of the debate has lacked a grounding in the sector’s history, the documented performance failures of existing institutions, and the urgency of the moment Namibia finds itself in. This memorandum seeks to provide that context.
I. Understanding the President’s Decision: The View from the Industry
To appreciate why President Netumbo Nandi-Ndaitwah made the decision to establish the UPU in her office, one must first ask a straightforward question: what would any incoming Head of State do upon assuming office and reviewing the state of the national petroleum sector? The answer, for any diligent and responsible leader, would be to take stock — and act decisively.
What President Nandi-Ndaitwah inherited was not a sector humming with efficient governance. It was one burdened by a national oil company in deep financial and institutional crisis, a regulatory architecture that had stalled investor confidence, exploration momentum that remained below its potential despite world-class discoveries, and a ministry that was tasked with managing both mineral resources and petroleum under a single roof — an arrangement that invites overload and divided attention.
No incoming leader, having read the files and absorbed the briefings, could in good conscience conclude that the status quo was sufficient. The establishment of a dedicated, high-level unit to focus the nation’s attention on the petroleum sector is not an act of overreach. It is an act of presidential responsibility.
II. NAMCOR and the National Oil Company Imperative
Any honest review of this sector must acknowledge the position of NAMCOR, our national oil company. It would be inappropriate and unnecessary to rehearse the specifics of NAMCOR’s recent difficulties in this forum — those matters are before the relevant authorities and must run their course. What can be said plainly, and without prejudice, is this: NAMCOR has suffered reputational damage that requires a serious overhaul. It has not delivered the growth or profitability that a national oil company of this historic moment should be generating. It lacks the institutional capacity and the forward-looking vision that Namibia’s hydrocarbon future demands. And it is in urgent need of a new generation of trained, skilled, and ethically grounded Namibian professionals who can carry this institution — and this sector — into its production era with credibility and purpose.
The UPU is not a replacement for NAMCOR. But it is precisely the kind of focused, high-level oversight structure that can ensure NAMCOR is rebuilt with purpose and held to clear performance standards — and that it is positioned to be a credible equity participant when first oil arrives. That is in every Namibian’s interest, and it is in Parliament’s interest to support a framework that makes it possible.
It must also be said — and said clearly — that NAMCOR does have within its ranks young, educated, and capable Namibians who have the potential to grow into the leaders this sector will need. The problem has never been the absence of Namibian talent. It has been the absence of the right leadership and board-level direction to nurture, deploy, and develop that talent. This is precisely where the UPU has a vital role to play: not only in overseeing strategy and investment, but in providing the guidance and framework for genuine capacity building — ensuring that Namibia’s own people are ready and positioned to lead this industry when production begins.
The President did not create a problem by establishing the UPU. She responded to one.
III. Billions at Stake — Risk Capital, Competition, and the Cost of Delay
Namibia sits on an estimated 11 billion barrels of oil and approximately 2.2 trillion cubic feet of natural gas — resources that, if prudently managed, carry the potential to transform the lives of generations of Namibians. The discoveries at Venus-1, Graff-1, and the Mopane field have made Namibia one of the most watched frontier energy markets on the African continent.
But we must never lose sight of what it took to get here. The billions of dollars that have flowed into Namibia’s upstream sector represent risk capital — money committed by international operators with no guarantee of a return, who placed a bet on our geology, our governance, and our potential. Attracting that capital took years of sustained effort: years of relationship-building, conference attendance, investor roadshows, regulatory negotiations, and the painstaking work of proving that Namibia was a credible and investable destination. Those of us who participated in that work — in the rooms, at the conferences, alongside our government counterparts — know how hard it was to earn that confidence. And we know how quickly it can be lost.
We are now at the most critical inflection point in that journey: moving from discovery to development, from exploration acreage to production reality. This transition demands a different quality of government engagement — faster, more focused, more decisive. And it demands it now, because Namibia is not competing in a vacuum.
While we deliberate internally, other African nations are racing to secure the same pool of global energy capital that we need to reach first oil. Mozambique, Tanzania, Senegal, Côte d’Ivoire — each of these countries is actively courting the same international operators, offering competitive fiscal terms, and signalling governmental seriousness at the highest levels. Every week that Namibia’s internal debate consumes without resolution is a week in which a rival jurisdiction becomes relatively more attractive. Capital is not loyal. It flows toward clarity, stability, and speed — and away from uncertainty. We cannot afford to be outpaced by countries that are moving decisively while we are still debating the architecture of our own governance.
There is also a lesson closer to home that we must not ignore. Namibia has held proven gas resources at Kudu for decades. For years, successive administrations grappled with the challenge of monetising that gas — of delivering a gas-to-power solution that could transform our energy security and reduce our dependence on imported electricity. And for years, despite genuine intent and significant study, no focused solution materialised. The reasons are familiar: divided ministerial attention, fragmented coordination across government, and the absence of a single empowered structure with the mandate and the authority to drive a complex, multi-stakeholder project to completion. The Kudu story is not a failure of the Namibian people or of technical capacity. It is a failure of institutional focus. The UPU, and the leadership vision it represents, offers the best opportunity we have had in a generation to ensure that Kudu does not remain a symbol of untapped potential — but becomes the foundation of a domestic gas industry that powers Namibian homes and businesses for decades to come.
Yet for those of us who have worked closely with international investors and exploration partners, a consistent message has echoed through boardrooms and conference rooms: Namibia’s potential is exceptional, but its regulatory responsiveness has not always kept pace. Investors — particularly those willing to commit the significant capital required for deepwater development — demand clarity, speed, and a credible counterpart at the highest level of government.
It is important to state clearly what the problem was — and what it was not. The professional staff within the Ministry of Mines and Energy’s petroleum directorate are, by and large, knowledgeable, dedicated, and capable. This memorandum is not a critique of those men and women. The challenge was structural, and it was at the leadership level. Following the landmark discoveries at Venus, Graff, and Mopane, the sector’s complexity and pace of change accelerated dramatically — yet the Ministry responsible for guiding it remained structured as it had been in a pre-discovery era, with a single ministerial mandate spanning both the mining sector and the entire petroleum value chain. That is an extraordinary breadth of responsibility, and it inevitably meant that neither sector received the singular, dedicated focus the moment demanded.
The result was what investors described, often diplomatically but unmistakably: stalled decisions, delayed responses, and a sense that the urgency on their side of the table was not being matched on the government’s side. This was not a failure of technical staff. It was a failure of institutional design — a system that had not yet caught up with the scale of what Namibia had become. The UPU directly addresses this gap. By splitting upstream petroleum from the broader mining mandate and elevating it to dedicated, presidential-level focus, the reform corrects a structural mismatch that has cost Namibia time and investment momentum it cannot afford to lose.
IV. The Strategic Logic: Why the Presidency Model Makes Sense
Opponents of the UPU have raised the concern that placing petroleum oversight in the Presidency risks concentrating too much power in one office. This is a legitimate governance principle, and it should be taken seriously — not dismissed. But it must also be assessed against the alternative: fragmented coordination, ministerial overload, and the accountability vacuum that has characterised the sector to date.
There is sound strategic reasoning behind presidential-level oversight of a national transformative resource:
• Because the petroleum sector intersects with the Ministries of Finance, Environment, Labour, Trade, and Defence — as well as with parastatals like NAMCOR — central coordination from the Presidency reduces policy fragmentation and eliminates the turf tensions that have historically delayed decision-making. Cross-government coordination:
• Placing the UPU in the Presidency elevates accountability rather than diminishing it. When the unit reports directly to the Head of State, there is no ambiguity about where responsibility lies. Critically, the Petroleum Amendment Bill also introduces annual parliamentary reporting requirements — ensuring legislative oversight is maintained. Accountability elevation:
• Namibia is not alone in this approach. Countries including the UAE and Nigeria have centralised petroleum authority at the executive level during critical phases of sector development. Namibia is navigating a transformative, pre-production phase that requires precisely this kind of high-level stewardship. International precedent:
• With upstream petroleum functions now dedicated to the UPU, the Ministry of Mines and Energy — and its able technical staff — can concentrate fully on the mineral resources mandate without the structural overload that the combined portfolio imposed. This is not a demotion of the Ministry; it is a recognition that both sectors have grown too large and too consequential to share a single ministerial lane. Liberating the Ministry of Mines and Energy:
The appointment of Kornelia Shilunga as head of the UPU has been questioned by some who present her as an unfamiliar face to the industry. This characterisation is simply inaccurate — and those of us who have worked in this sector know it. Long before her current appointment, Shilunga was present in the rooms where Namibia’s oil and gas story was being told to the world. As Deputy Minister of Mines and Energy, she joined her then-Ministers in travelling to international energy conferences, standing shoulder to shoulder with private sector operators and investors, and passionately championing Namibia’s upstream potential. She was not a passive observer — she was an active advocate for this country’s energy future. Her appointment is not a leap into the unknown. It is a return to a sector she has long understood and cared about.
Carlo McLeod, as former Deputy General Manager at Chevron Namibia and Deputy Director of Petroleum Affairs at the Ministry of Mines and Energy, adds deep technical and commercial credibility. He brings additional standing through membership in bodies such as the Association of International Petroleum Negotiators and the Society of Petroleum Engineers, and is recognised for his expertise in petroleum law, governance, and national capacity building. Together, these appointments reflect a deliberate effort to build a unit grounded in expertise rather than political convenience.
V. A Word on the Bill and Parliament’s Stake
The Petroleum Amendment Bill currently before Parliament is not a threat to legislative oversight — it is an invitation to deepen it. The bill’s introduction of annual parliamentary reporting on royalty remissions and petroleum sector performance is a new accountability mechanism, one that did not exist under the previous framework.
Honourable Members are not being asked to cede oversight. They are being asked to formalise it. For a sector that — let us recall — failed to report to Parliament for four consecutive years, this is a meaningful step forward.
Parliament’s role in Namibia’s oil future is not diminished by the establishment of the UPU. It is enhanced. The bill creates structured channels through which parliamentarians can interrogate the sector’s performance, hold the unit accountable, and ensure that Namibian citizens receive their rightful share of petroleum revenues. Every member of Parliament — regardless of political affiliation — has a constituency that stands to benefit enormously from a well-governed oil sector. That alignment of interest should guide this debate.
VI. An Honest Note: Time Is Not on Our Side
In offering this support, I would be remiss if I did not also acknowledge what concerns me about the current moment — not the UPU itself, but the energy being consumed in contesting it.
Namibia is in a race. The geology is extraordinary. The investor interest is real. But first oil is not guaranteed — it must be earned through decisive action, regulatory clarity, skilled workforce development, and the kind of consistent, trusted governance that makes international operators choose to accelerate rather than pause. Every month spent in institutional debate is a month not spent on:
• Finalising the regulatory framework that will govern development agreements and production sharing contracts;
• Training and certifying Namibian engineers, geoscientists, and petroleum economists who will one day lead this industry;
• Ensuring that local content frameworks are in place so that Namibian businesses and workers are positioned to benefit from the upstream supply chain;
• Securing the fiscal terms that will attract the capital needed to move discoveries from appraisal to development phase.
The debate around the UPU, while understandable, has consumed political bandwidth that Namibia cannot afford to waste. Let Parliament deliberate — but let it deliberate with urgency and purpose. The world will not wait for our internal disagreements to resolve themselves. Competing nations will simply absorb the capital and momentum we leave on the table.
I respectfully encourage all honourable members and our country’s leadership to channel the same analytical energy currently directed at the UPU’s structure toward the more consequential questions: Are we training enough Namibians to work in this sector? Is our local content policy robust enough? Is NAMCOR being genuinely reformed so that it can be a credible equity participant in future production? Is our environmental framework adequate for deepwater operations? And — when will Kudu gas finally power a Namibian home?
These are the questions on which Namibia’s oil future will actually turn.
VII. Conclusion: A Call for Constructive Consensus
Namibia stands at a genuinely historic crossroads. The oil discoveries of recent years are not theoretical. They are real, they are large, and they carry the potential to address poverty, fund education and healthcare, build infrastructure, and secure intergenerational wealth for all Namibians. But history is replete with nations that squandered their natural resource inheritance — not because the resources ran out, but because institutions failed and politics displaced strategy.
President Nandi-Ndaitwah’s decision to establish the UPU and drive the Petroleum Amendment Bill is a deliberate, evidence-based response to documented institutional failure. It reflects the kind of presidential seriousness that investors require and that citizens deserve. It is not without imperfections — no institutional reform ever is — and Parliament’s role in shaping its final form and holding it accountable should be embraced, not resisted.
I call on honourable members to support the passage of the Petroleum Amendment Bill, with whatever constructive amendments strengthen its accountability provisions. I call on our country’s leadership to contextualise this debate within the broader sector history and the competitive global energy landscape we are operating in. And I call on all stakeholders to remember, above all, what we are ultimately working toward.
A Namibia that reaches first oil. A Namibia whose people are trained and ready. A Namibia whose wealth belongs to all its citizens.
That is the goal. Let us govern in a manner worthy of it.
Submitted respectfully in the public interest.
Knowledge Katti
Namibian Investor in Oil and Gas
