Otjiwarongo CEO accused of shielding ‘baby mama’ in ghost worker scandal

A complaint submitted to the Anti-Corruption Commission (ACC) by concerned municipal employees alleges that Otjiwarongo Municipality chief executive officer (CEO) Mberipura Hifitikeko has been involved in corrupt activities, including shielding his “baby mama”, a payroll officer, who allegedly processed payments for a ghost employee for approximately 12 months. The complaint, dated 6 May 2026, claims that when the irregularity was discovered, the Human Resources Department initiated disciplinary proceedings, but Hifitikeko intervened and ordered the case file to be transferred to his office for legal advice.

The employees claim that the matter subsequently died, with the payroll officer eventually resigning. It remains unclear whether the municipality recovered the money allegedly paid to the ghost employee. The complaint further alleges that the municipality paid over N$155 000 to lawyer Jeff Tjitemisa in December 2024 for advice on several long-standing disciplinary cases, including the ghost worker matter. However, the employees claim that the files were eventually returned to the Human Resources Department without the lawyer’s opinion, raising questions about the purpose and value of the legal services paid for.

The allegations form part of a broader complaint accusing Hifitikeko of allegedly turning the municipality into a network of personal connections since his appointment in August 2024. Employees claim that recruitment, procurement and legal consultancy processes have been manipulated to benefit his associates. They describe the situation as a municipal “corruption gravy train” and allege that the CEO has systematically sidelined established administrative structures to consolidate control over appointments and expenditure.

One of the major issues raised is the appointment of Muhindua Kaura, described in the complaint as Hifitikeko’s cousin and personal friend, through his company, Aruak Consultancy Services, to assist with the recruitment of strategic executive positions. The employees allege that Hifitikeko bypassed the procurement process and hand-picked Kaura without declaring his personal interest. They further claim that Kaura’s company was appointed without submitting mandatory procurement documents and received an advance payment before commencing work.

The employees allege that Kaura’s company charged the municipality VAT despite allegedly not being registered for the tax at the time. The complaint questions whether Kaura, reportedly a full-time executive at state-owned electricity distributor Cenored, obtained leave from his employer to undertake the consultancy work or performed the assignments during working hours. The employees further allege that Hifitikeko and Kaura were directly involved in shortlisting candidates and selecting interview panels, some of which allegedly comprised their personal associates.

The complaint also alleges that the CEO created a procurement supervisor position for his former personal assistant, despite the position allegedly not appearing on the municipality’s organisational structure or wage bill. It further claims that Utaara Kasete, an employee of Cenored and reportedly Kaura’s sister-in-law, participated in the recruitment process for the CEO’s personal assistant. The employees claim that recruitment functions were deliberately removed from the Human Resources Department and transferred to the CEO’s office, effectively sidelining the department from its core responsibilities.

The employees argue that procurement practices within the municipality’s Technical Department are another major concern, with most technical procurements conducted through emergency procurement and requests for sealed quotations, methods they claim are susceptible to abuse. They further allege that the Procurement Committee has effectively been reduced to a rubber-stamping body, with members allegedly discussing agenda items with the CEO before formal meetings and subsequently taking note of decisions that had already been made.

Key points

• The complaint alleges that Hifitikeko has been involved in corrupt activities, including shielding his “baby mama” in a ghost worker scandal and manipulating recruitment and procurement processes to benefit his associates.
• The employees claim that the CEO has systematically sidelined established administrative structures to consolidate control over appointments and expenditure, creating a municipal “corruption gravy train”.
• The complaint questions the appointment of legal consultants, alleging that Hifitikeko repeatedly engaged law firms associated with his friends without following procurement procedures or obtaining competing quotations.