KINDLY allow me to use the medium of your esteemed newspaper to respond to aspects of an article published in the Windhoek Observer of 1 July 2016, which related to the appointment of the CEO of Agribank.
This article was written by a reporter (name provided), who seems to enjoy writing under the guise of a Staff Reporter. Somewhat mischievously, the reporter referred to me as having resigned from Old Mutual ‘under a cloud’. Not only is this statement non-factual and baseless, but it also amounts to libelous and unethical reporting which borders on defamation, impinges on my dignity and tarnishes my good name, reputation and track record in corporate Namibia, the church and my community.
The reporter has done so much damage to my name and his ill-conceived use of a malicious term cannot be rationalised or debated away as he seems to think. Challenged to explain what this ‘under a cloud’ entails – since he claims to be so well informed – the reporter could only claim that he has information from ‘senior executives inside Old Mutual’ who, it would appear, variously told him that ‘I was unhappy with some changes that happened there’ or that ‘I had a disagreement with my boss’.
As I have stated to the reporter telephonically and in email communication subsequent to the publication of his article, none of what he asserts is true. Although I do not consider the straight-forward matter of my resignation as of any public interest and thus not newsworthy, I did have the courtesy of explaining the reasons for my progression from Old Mutual to the reporter, and the fact that this was a development which was discussed with generations of my supervisors over the past few years. This fact cannot be refuted and I challenge anyone with contrary facts to bring them to the fore under their own name. Furthermore, I am not aware of any disagreement (slight or significant) which I had with any of my previous bosses, which would have resulted in my resignation. Again, this fact cannot be refuted by anyone – not the reporter, not any of my previous bosses and certainly not any of the nameless and faceless ‘senior executives’ on which he seems to depend for his misinformation.
Again, I challenge anyone with contrary facts to place them transparently on the table. I submit the same challenge for the reporter’s assertion that I resigned because I was ‘unhappy about some changes at Old Mutual’. Exactly what these changes were, this reporter could not state to me. Since my resignation seems to be such a public interest story to him, he might as well place all of these things on the table. Why claim to be so well informed but hold back on what he knows? Why smear the name of someone who irrefutably has so much integrity?
Finally, here are some pertinent questions to Mr. Reporter: even if, hypothetically, I had principle disagreements with any or all of my previous bosses and, based on my principles, I decided to move on, what would be ‘cloudy’ about that? I ask the same question about moving on, based on principles, if I were unhappy about changes in the work environment. What would be ‘cloudy’ about that? And to complete this picture, I served my full three months’ notice at Old Mutual – another irrefutable fact. Would someone who resigned ‘under a cloud’ ever be allowed to do that?
I leave it to your readers to judge for themselves.
Confidente. Lifting the Lid. Copyright © 2015