By Lot Ndamanomhata
This article is in response to a recent published article titled “Visa on Arrival: Travel Industry Fears Damage to Namibia’s Image.”
1. Namibia’s “Visa on Arrival” Policy: A Well-Intended but Ill-Timed Shift
The article offers a detailed and valuable window into the travel sector’s concerns regarding the recently updated ‘Visa on Arrival’ policy, implemented on 1 April 2025.
While logistical issues such as long queues, confusing forms, and processing inefficiencies appear well documented, the underlying motivation is reciprocity in international travel and deserves a more balanced exploration.
Namibia’s revised visa policy is not merely an administrative change. It is a political assertion. It responds to an imbalanced global visa system in which Namibians and Africans at large routinely face excessive, costly, and often humiliating visa application processes, especially for travel to Europe and North America.
2. The Myth of One-Way Hospitality: When African Hospitality Isn’t Returned
The backlash against Namibia’s visa reciprocity policy seems to overlook the glaring inequalities that Namibian citizens endure:
• Namibians must pay €90 (N$1,800) for a Schengen visa more than the N$1,600 visa fee charged to tourists entering Namibia.
• Citizens often have to travel to South Africa to apply, particularly when certain embassies are not represented locally.
• The documentation burden such as bank statements, itineraries, invitation letters, employment confirmations is severe.
• Proof of accomodation or hotel reservations.
• Travel/medical insurance with policy wording (coverage for medical expenses/repatriation vales at € 30 000 for European/Schengen countries for starters.
• According to VisaVerge and CNN Africa, Africans lost an estimated US$70 million in 2024 to denied or rejected Schengen visa applications. Nigeria alone lost ₦7.2 billion (over US$5 million) due to rejections.
So the question must be asked:
Why should Namibia continue offering visa-free entry to citizens of countries that subject Namibians to costly, discriminatory, and bureaucratically burdensome visa regimes?
3. Tourism Sector Alarmism: Short-Term Thinking vs. Sovereign Rights
While the tourism industry’s concerns about booking declines and long queues are valid, the critique borders on alarmism when it suggests Namibia is “shooting itself in the foot” or irreparably damaging its image.
A few key points to consider:
• The timing and rollout of the policy, not the policy itself appear to be the core problem.
• Process inefficiencies (long queues, form confusion) are typical teething issues in any major policy shift and can be resolved administratively.
• The underlying principle of visa reciprocity is normative and just. It is a call for equal treatment of African travellers.
Moreover, if international tourists can afford the high costs of flights, accommodation, and safaris, a one-time visa fee of N$1,600 is unlikely to be a deterrent especially when many countries charge more and require in-person consular interviews.
4. Visa Reciprocity: A Balanced Approach to International Mobility
Visa reciprocity is a foundational principle in international relations. It ensures that countries extend equivalent visa requirements and privileges to each other’s citizens. This mutual arrangement promotes fairness in cross-border travel, diplomatic goodwill, and global mobility (Garfinkel Immigration Law Firm, n.d.).
In the United States, visa reciprocity is reflected through specific issuance fees and validity periods for nonimmigrant visas, based on the treatment U.S. citizens receive abroad (U.S. Department of State, n.d.). Similarly, the European Union embeds reciprocity into its common visa policy, pursuing reciprocal arrangements with non-EU nations (European Commission, 2018).
Recent global actions reinforce this norm:
• Namibia announced plans to impose visa requirements on over 30 countries that have not reciprocated its open visa policies (Henley & Partners, 2024).
• Brazil reinstated visa requirements for citizens of the U.S., Canada, and Australia in line with its longstanding reciprocity approach (Associated Press, 2024).
These moves underscore a simple principle: visa reciprocity fosters mutual respect and fair treatment, thereby strengthening bilateral relations and encouraging seamless global travel.
5. Diplomatic Fairness ≠ Economic Suicide
Critics argue that Namibia should not “punish” tourists for the actions of their governments. That perhaps is fair point to raise, but it presumes the current system is purely economic and not structurally unjust. Why should Namibia continue grant easy access to its border while its citizens faces severe administrative restrictions especially western countries.
Namibia’s visa shift is not about punishing tourists. It is about:
• Challenging a global asymmetry in which African countries are expected to remain perpetually open while facing systemic barriers abroad.
• Demanding dignity and reciprocity in international travel relations.
• Encouraging dialogue: If Namibia like other African nations begins to assert fair treatment as a policy goal, it may pressure global systems into introspection.
Even European policy experts acknowledge that Schengen reforms are unlikely to extend reciprocal visa-free access to Africans any time soon, an implicit admission of the system’s entrenched eurocentrism.
6. What Should Be Done? Suggestions for a Balanced Approach
Namibia can maintain the principle of reciprocity while reducing unnecessary harm to the tourism sector. Here’s how:
• Improve airport processing: Implement simplified digital platforms, pre-arrival verification, and e-gates for e-visa holders.
• Strengthen communication: Inform airlines and passengers of form requirements in advance, including onboard.
• Special lanes for e-visa holders to avoid bottlenecks.
• Public transparency: Clearly explain that this is a sovereignty-based requirement, not a punitive tax. For example, a Namibian traveller recently reported waiting nearly five hours just to have their passport stamped in France.
• Tourism marketing: If feasible, frame the visa fee as an investment in safety, conservation, or infrastructure but only if this claim can be substantiated.
7. Continental Context: Namibia Is Not Alone
Namibia’s position reflects a broader continental dynamic. Across Africa:
• Millions of dollars are lost annually due to denied visa applications, fees paid with no service rendered. The fees paid are regardless whether visa is granted or not
• Rejection rates for Africans seeking Schengen visas exceed 50%, even when all documentation is provided. Presenting a narrative that African immigrants are not necessarily welcome in Europe, yet we are keen on freely opening our borders for the sake of simply economic benefits.
• Countries like Nigeria, Kenya, Ghana, and South Africa have increasingly called for reciprocal policies.
• African leaders, such as Zambia’s President in 2024, have called for visa fee refunds on denied applications.
If Africa is to reclaim agency in global mobility, Namibia’s actions should not be viewed as protectionist but rather as a principled stand for dignity.
Conclusion: Restoring a Balance
Namibia’s updated visa-on-arrival policy is a bold yet principled response to a deeply unequal global travel regime. While its implementation requires refinement, its foundation is rooted in fairness. Yes, tourists may be inconvenienced.
Yes, the travel industry may face short-term disruptions. But Namibia like many African nations is signalling that hospitality must be mutual, not one-sided.
Until global mobility is truly fair, policies like these are not acts of punishment but they are assertions of sovereignty, dignity, and justice.
*Lot Ndamanomhata is graduate of Public Management, Journalism and Communication. This article reflects his views and writes entirely in his personal capacity.
