Identifier
Created
Classification
Origin
05GABORONE294
2005-02-28 13:05:00
UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
Embassy Gaborone
Cable title:  

COURT RULES IN FAVOR OF CRITICAL ACADEMIC

Tags:  PHUM PGOV BC 
pdf how-to read a cable
This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available.

281305Z Feb 05

ACTION AF-00 

INFO LOG-00 NP-00 AID-00 AMAD-00 CIAE-00 INL-00 USNW-00 
 DODE-00 DS-00 EB-00 UTED-00 VC-00 H-00 TEDE-00 
 INR-00 IO-00 L-00 VCE-00 NSAE-00 OIC-00 PA-00 
 GIWI-00 PRS-00 P-00 SP-00 STR-00 TRSE-00 FMP-00 
 R-00 DSCC-00 PRM-00 DRL-00 G-00 SAS-00 /000W
 ------------------C04191 281413Z /38 
FM AMEMBASSY GABORONE
TO SECSTATE WASHDC 1785
INFO SOUTHERN AFRICAN DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY
HQ USEUCOM VAIHINGEN GE
NSC WASHDC
UNCLAS GABORONE 000294 

SIPDIS


SENSITIVE

AF/S FOR DIFFILY

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: PHUM PGOV BC
SUBJECT: COURT RULES IN FAVOR OF CRITICAL ACADEMIC

REF GABORONE 286

UNCLAS GABORONE 000294

SIPDIS


SENSITIVE

AF/S FOR DIFFILY

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: PHUM PGOV BC
SUBJECT: COURT RULES IN FAVOR OF CRITICAL ACADEMIC

REF GABORONE 286


1. (SBU) Summary: On February 28, Botswana's High Court
ruled in favor of embattled academic and critic of the GOB
Prof. Kenneth Good by rejecting the Attorney General's
arguments that the court had no authority to issue an
interdict against the state. Judge Sapire issued an order
granting Good temporary relief by barring the Government
from enforcing its deportation order and giving Good
approximately four weeks to initiate proceedings for
substantive relief (i.e. to file a case alleging that the
deportation order was unlawful or unconstitutional). This
ruling underscores the independence of the judiciary in
Botswana and opens the executive to the prospect of new
limits on its far-reaching powers, thereby challenging a
pillar of Botswana's political culture. End Summary.

--------------
COURT TO HEAR GOOD'S CASE AGAINST GOB
--------------


2. (U) On February 28, Botswana's High Court ruled against
the preliminary arguments of the Attorney General's Chamber
that the court acted outside its authority by issuing on
February 19 an interdict against the state's order of
deportation against Professor Kenneth Good of February 18.
Judge Sapire cited Section 18 of the Botswana Constitution,
which enshrines the right of an individual to apply to the
High Court if one's constitutional rights, including the
freedom of expression, allegedly have been violated.
Section 18 also grants the High Court the authority to make
such orders at it deems appropriate in order to secure the
enforcement of an individual's constitutional rights.
Consequently, the Judge granted Good interim relief by
barring the Government from deporting him while his order
remained in effect to enable Good to remain in Botswana and
challenge the deportation order.


3. (U) According to Judge Sapire's order, Good's attorneys
have until March 30 to initiate proceedings seeking
substantive relief from the Government's deportation order
(i.e. file a case alleging that the deportation order was
unlawful or unconstitutional). As required by law, Good's
attorneys notified the Attorney General on February 21 of
their intent to institute such proceedings. If the Attorney
General's Chamber waives the waiting period, Good's
attorneys must institute proceedings within one week of the
date of that waiver. Failing this, the provisions of the

court order will expire and the state will be free to deport
Good.


4. (SBU) Joao Salbany, a member of Good's legal team, told
PolOff that he and his colleagues plan to utilize the full
time allotted to them under the court order before
instituting proceedings. Salbany suspected that the
Attorney General's Chamber might attempt to waive the
waiting period in order to speed the case along. Good's
attorneys would challenge the Government's right to do this
but would be prepared to commence early in any event, he
said.

--------------
LARGE CROWD SUPPORTS GOOD
--------------


5. (U) A large crowd again turned out in support of
Professor Good to hear the judge's ruling. In addition to
students and faculty from University of Botswana, local and
some international press were present, including journalists
from South Africa, the Netherlands and Australia. A
triumphant Good and his attorneys lingered outside the
courtroom to express confidence in their case.

--------------
UNIVERSITY RESISTED PRESSURE TO FIRE GOOD?
--------------


6. (SBU) According to a colleague of Prof. Good's from the
University of Botswana's Department of Government and Public
Administration, the GOB had pressured the university not to
renew Good's contract when it was up for renewal last year.
Our interlocutor said that the University had rebuffed this
infringement on its independence and renewed Good's
contract. Even if this as yet uncorroborated accusation is
not accurate, Good's unpopularity with the ruling party has
been beyond doubt for years. The University's decision to
renew his contract in spite of this illustrates its
independence from the Government.

-------------- ---
RULING TO CHALLENGE BOTSWANA'S POLITICAL CULTURE
-------------- ---


7. (SBU) A senior official of the ruling Botswana Democratic
Party told PolOff and Pol Assistant on February 24 that many
of his party colleagues feared that a ruling in Good's favor
would have dangerous repercussions for governance in
Botswana. They were concerned, he said, that if the court
could suspend the enforcement of a state order, the
government would hesitate to make any decision worrying
whether it would be overruled by the judiciary. This
comment demonstrates the degree to which the power of the
executive has become entrenched in Botswana, so much so that
the idea of accountability to the people and the
constitution through the courts seems an alien notion.

--------------
COMMENT
--------------


8. (SBU) Today's ruling confirms that Botswana enjoys an
independent judiciary capable of protecting an individual's
constitutional and democratic rights. Likewise, Good's
continued employment by the University of Botswana despite
his trenchant criticism of the Government signifies that the
Government's powers are not unlimited. Nonetheless, the
executive enjoys considerable powers relative to its
citizens and to the other branches of government. Like the
controversy surrounding the location of a second university,
this legal dispute will advance public discussion of
presidential powers. It has the potential to rein in the
disproportionate- to the other branches of government--
exercise of executive power.
HUGGINS


NNNN