The United States should learn from Namibia

It always blows my mind when countries thought of as “third world” or “uncivilized” seem to have more insight and respect for human rights than the United States. Take, for example, Namibia — the African nation known most famously, perhaps, as the site of the first genocide of the 20th century, when German colonial forces massacred the Herero and Nama people. Today, however, Namibia is earning attention for something very different: its willingness to question the wisdom and legality of creating a sex offender registry. In a time when Western nations have embraced registries as unquestionable “tools for public safety,” Namibian lawyers, civil rights advocates, and policymakers are urging caution, citing constitutional concerns and human rights implications.

According to The Namibian, Justice Minister Wise Immanuel recently announced that the country is considering the establishment of a national (non-public) sex offenders registery. The government insists the registry will be implemented with sensitivity and in line with human rights principles. But that reassurance has not silenced growing skepticism from lawyers and activists, who question both the necessity and constitutionality of such a measure.

Prominent human rights attorney Norman Tjombe argued that Namibia already has an effective system in place. The police maintain a certificate-of-conduct database that records all criminal convictions, including sexual offenses. He questioned whether a separate registry would do anything other than duplicate existing mechanisms. Tjombe and others also warned that registries around the world have shown little evidence of preventing sexual crimes. Instead, they often push people underground and make reintegration nearly impossible. Worse, public fear and stigma can lead to vigilantism, harassment, and even violence against people listed — regardless of their actual risk or rehabilitation progress.

Critics also point out that such a registry could infringe on Namibia’s constitutional protections for privacy, dignity, and equality. Without clear parameters for who is listed, for how long, and under what circumstances information can be disclosed, the system risks becoming an extrajudicial punishment that undermines the very principles of justice it claims to protect. Rather than embracing punitive measures that have proven ineffective elsewhere, Tjombe suggested Namibia invest in rehabilitation, education, and prevention — efforts that address the root causes of sexual violence rather than perpetuating cycles of fear and exclusion.

What makes this debate remarkable is that Namibia — a country still healing from the legacy of colonialism and apartheid — is taking a much more mature approach in policy making than the United States. We should learn from them.