So this is it Judge Kato van Niekerk? Your Honour, I don't mean to attack the merit of your judgment earlier this week for imposing a fine on Mr Laz Shaduka. I mean if you find him guilty of culpable homicide and attempting to obstruct the course of justice, then the fine you imposed on him is fairly justified.

Our judiciary is probably one of the most inconsistent in contemporary memory. I mean, these days if you dare steal livestock - big or small - you must kiss seeing the sun again goodbye, because the sentence for that is about 30 years.

Sackey Namugongo has been in jail since June 11 after he was convicted of stealing about N$300000. Judge Sarel Jacobs told Namugongo in my presence that the former TV personality would spend eight years of his remaining life in prison, because corruption was on the increase in Namibia and his punishment was meant to be testimony that our courts have decided to meet other authorities halfway in combating corruption.

But can one of you, my dear readers, argue that the number of corruption cases in Namibia today is really higher than the numbers of cases in which women have been shot and hacked with pangas by their husbands and boyfriends?

Are the courts only interested in curbing corruption and not the way our mothers and sisters are suffering at the hands of men?

Selma Shaimemanya died a horrible death. I am not going into the merit of the build up to her death because I don't know and I am confused by the many stories I have heard about this issue so far.

From committing suicide, outright murder, to wrongly handling a gun until a shot went off accidentally. Only God and the then 11-month-old daughter of the couple know what really happened that night - unfortunately none of them could be at court to testify.

I am not accusing anyone of murdering Selma, because nobody was proven to have murdered her.

I do know, however, that the judgment has sent shockwaves down the spines of many women and among those spines was that of Pendukeni Iivula-Ithana, the Justice Minister, who described the judgment as "unbelievable".

The judgment also instilled fresh fears in the hearts of women, as they continue to seek answers of who would protect them if not the courts and other authorities. Men, on the other hand, especially those with money and are habitually abusive towards their women, have certainly found new courage to continue abusing their better halves.

Of course, Shaduka should not be used as a guinea pig for the judiciary to test its strength in combating domestic violence, not especially when he was cleared on the murder charge he faced.

However, the speed at which the case was concluded, counting from the day the trial started, and State's failure to produce more evidence of what really transpired on the fateful night, might have had an influence on the final judgment.

The world is mad at Shaduka, but this could have been avoided if it had been proven beyond any reasonable doubt that his side of the story is indeed true. I am sure if more investigation was done and Shaduka's version implicitly confirmed to be true, it would have been unfair to be mad at him.

But now you cannot crucify those that are questioning the judgment and its merit because the existing circumstances are such that any average-minded person would be compelled to feel the way they currently do.

Eewa!