On February 14th the High Court dismissed an application by nine opposition parties to have the November 2009 National Assembly election, or the announcement of its results, declared null and void (February 2011, The political scene). The parties had hoped to secure a rerun of the election or, failing that, a recount of the votes. However, according to the long-awaited judgment by the judge president of the court, Petrus Damaseb, and judge Collins Parker, the High Court had not heard evidence of the alleged irregularities that could have enabled a rigged election. Specifically, the "very unspecific and generalised" allegation of ballot-stuffing due to unrealistically high voter turnout and turnout of over 100% in some areas was rejected, as the Court accepted the submission of the Electoral Commission of Namibia (ECN) that the applicants had relied on the wrong voters' register and not on the latest one gazetted on November 9th 2009. Other allegations-including duplicate voter registrations, irregularities in tendered votes (those cast outside a voter's registered constituency), and the inclusion of dead people on the voters' roll-were deemed too general and lacking in evidence. The applicants had produced no direct evidence of ballot-stuffing; the judges reminded them: "Courts work on proven facts and not on conjecture, innuendo and unsubstantiated conspiracy theories."

However, the court was highly critical of the ECN-and its director, Moses Ndjarakana, who had made a false declaration under oath and been evasive in his evidence-for the confusion about the voters' register used in the election, a serious lapse that had aroused suspicion among the opposition parties. Those responsible for this and other lapses should be held accountable, the Court said. Indeed, the case had raised "fundamental issues about electoral governance in this country and the need to run electoral affairs in a manner that avoids unnecessary suspicion fuelled by confusion created by those who run elections". The judges said that Namibia's electoral law was scattered, with a "myriad of amendments" and errors of drafting, and called for this to be put right before the next elections. In view of the ECN's poor conduct both of the election and in its defence of the case, the Court departed from usual practice and did not order the losing parties to bear its costs; they were, however, ordered to pay the costs of the second respondent in the case, the South West Africa People's Organisation (SWAPO).