A respondent in motion proceedings, Hollard Insurance Company Ltd (Hollard) brought an interlocutory application before it could file an answering affidavit to have subpoenas duces tecum issued against the Attorney-General of the Republic of Namibia (A-G) and the Secretary to the Cabinet of the Republic of Namibia (Cabinet Secretary). The two constitutional office holders were not party to the proceedings in which Hollard was sued but Hollard justified the subpoenas on the basis that it needed documents to resist the applicant’s case (Gondwana).
Hollard maintains that in terms of Art 12(1)(a) and (e . . .