TIN THE HIGH COURT OF NAMIBIA, MAIN DIVISION HELD AT WINDHOEK CASE NUMBER: HC-MD-ClV.MOT=GEN-2018/00083 In the matter between: CHIEF TSAMKXAO $OMA 1 APPLICANT JUPHOANSI TRADITIONAL AUTHORITY 2°4 APPLICANT ‘THE BOARD AND MANAGEMENT ‘COMMITTEE OF THE NYAE NYAE ‘COMMUNAL CONSERVANCY 31 APPLICANT ‘THE BOARD AND MANAGEMENT ‘COMMITTEE OF THE NYAE NYAE ‘COMMUNITY FOREST 4 APPLICANT and MINISTER OF LAND REFORM ‘4 RESPONDENT (OTJOZONDJUPA COMMUNAL LAND BOARD 2° RESPONDENT MINISTER OF ENVIRONMENT AND TOURISM. 3° RESPONDENT MINISTER OF AGRICULTURE AND 4" RESPONDENT. FORESTRY DIRECTOR OF FORESTRY 5” RESPONDENT ‘STEVEN AMUNYELA 6” RESPONDENT 2 \ _ nieMINISTER OF SAFETY AND SECURITY 7® RESPONDENT INSPECTOR GENERAL OF THE NAMIBIAN POLICE FORCE, 8” RESPONDENT PROSECUTOR GENERAL, 9 RESPONDENT TJIZERA KAVEZENJI 410" RESPONDENT TJITINDI VAZAPO 11 RESPONDENT KAAPUHU MAJUVA, 12” RESPONDENT KAUHEVA VETIAJE 19" RESPONDENT MURAMBI NJANDEREEKO 14” RESPONDENT MATIRO DIKUWA 18" RESPONDENT N.NGOMBE 16" RESPONDENT REPLYING AFFIDAVIT |. the undersigned, TSAMKXAO 4OMA, Do hereby make oath and state as follows: 1. 11am the first applicant in these motion proceedings, supported ty the second, third and fourth applicants, All the applicants’ further particulars are more fully described in my founding affidavitAllof the facts deposed to by me herein are within my own personal knowiedge, unless indicated to the contrary or as the context may imply and ere, tothe best ‘of my knowledge and belief, both true and correct {have read the answering affidavit of KAUHEVA VETIAJE and reply to address new issues raised by the respondents in their answering papers. “The respondents have raised points in imine which were not addressed in my {founding papers. | do not admit that the respondents have any justifiable defence lo our claim. ‘The new issues raised bythe respondents in their answering papers are without legal merit. In my consideration, these new issues raised by the respondents do not taint the legitimacy ofthe applicants’ cause of ation, nor the locus stand of any of the parties. | am advised that these new issues raised by the respondents, regarding ocus standing, ancestral land rights, perpetual grazing rights arising from private contract of sale of cat, that my founding affidavit is fatally defective and that | do not understand the contents of the declaration Which | have made under oath, are primary @ legal issue to be ampified in legal argument by our legal practitioners in due course. It is thus the applicants’ contention that the respondents seek ‘0 raise issue Where there is no dispute of fact in order to prevent a proper determination of issues on the papers and that these new issues raised by the offending Cae