The future of in-situ leach uranium mining in the Omaheke Region will be determined entirely on technical evidence and scientific findings.
“If the science says no, we will say no. It is not a political decision, it is a scientific decision. We are taking into account two valuable resources, one is the water, one is the uranium. We are not ignorant of the importance of those,” said Timoteus Mufeti, Environmental Commissioner at the Ministry of Environment and Tourism (MEFT).
This position was clarified by Namibian government representatives Mufeti and
Axel Tibinyane, Director for Atomic Energy and Radiation Protection Authority at the Ministry of Health and Social Service, during a media briefing on 25 February.
Following an independent review conducted recently by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) into the Leonardville project officials confirmed that the state is currently awaiting a final technical report which is expected at the end of March 2026. No decision has been made regarding the proposal by Headspring Investment.
“Whether you're for or against the project, the sentiment is that science must prevail in decision-making. And this is why we approached the IAEA. We know (in situ mining) is working in other countries, but we are concerned, especially that it will take place in the aquifer and drinking water,” said Mufeti.
During the briefing, questions were raised by Agri Monitor regarding the impartiality of the IAEA’s review, specifically pointing to Deputy Director General Mikhail Chudakov’s professional history with Rosatom.
Tibinyane dismissed these concerns stating that international officials are bound by organizational values and codes of conduct that transcend individual biases.
“As much as you have him there who has connections with Russia, equally you have other employees from the U.S. for example who are connected with other U.S.-based organizations. But we put our confidence in the organization (IAEA) to work within its set frame and uphold its values; at the end of the day, science is science and two plus two will still remain two plus two irrespective of who you are,” said Tibinyane.
The discussion also focused on whether the project constitutes the best long-term decision for the future generations of Namibian children and the nation's future. “We as a nation have realized that we need to develop an industry around this resource [uranium] because it is fueling many economies across the globe. However, this is a finite resource and we must be mindful that we won't have it forever; we must find ways to continue to exploit it while ensuring we build other activities that will outlive the resource itself,” said Tibinyane.
The regulatory goal is to ensure that strategic resources are managed without compromising environmental safety or public health. Mufeti concluded that if the methodology is found to be scientifically unsafe, the project will not proceed. The final determination remains pending an inter-ministerial review of the IAEA’s recommendations.
Mufeti did assure the public that the IAEA is not a decision-making body. The final decision lies with the Namibian government.
