The court determined whether the absence of a valid work permit rendered the employment contract with the third respondent illegal and unenforceable, despite his refugee status. Analyzing international legal instruments on refugee protection, the Court noted refugees must adhere to regulations for maintaining public order. The Immigration Control Act mandates non-Namibians to obtain work permits. Mr. Rutagarama claimed exemption due to refugee status, invoking international law protection. However, the Court, considering Namibian immigration laws aiming at both control and employment opportunities for citizens, held Mr. Rutagarama subject to the domestic law provision.
Refugees, work permit, illegal employment contract, immigration laws
This appeal concerns the dispute over the unlawful dismissal of the third respondent, a refugee. The appellant terminated third respondent’s employment due to his lack of a valid work permit under the Immigration Control Act, despite refugee status. The third respondent contested the dismissal, leading to arbitration. The arbitrator upheld the dismissal but granted leave, a severance package, and compensation. The appellant appealed, arguing that the arbitrator exceeded jurisdiction by considering an undocumented alien. The third respondent cross-appealed against the arbitrator's finding of fair dismissal.
The appeal was dismissed. The court ruled that the dismissal of the third respondent was for a fair reason and set aside the decision of the arbitrator to award the third responded leave and severance package.
The court ruled that the Namibian legal system prohibits enforcing a contract deemed void (of no force of effect) by a statutory requirement. Despite recognizing potential injustice, the court could not allow payment to the third respondent for work done in violation of the statute's explicit prohibition.