Identifier
Created
Classification
Origin
05GABORONE600
2005-05-02 14:33:00
CONFIDENTIAL
Embassy Gaborone
Cable title:  

CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT FALLS SHORT OF TRIBAL

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.

021433Z May 05

ACTION AF-00 

INFO LOG-00 NP-00 AID-00 AMAD-00 CIAE-00 INL-00 DODE-00 
 PERC-00 DS-00 EB-00 VC-00 H-00 TEDE-00 INR-00 
 IO-00 LAB-01 L-00 VCE-00 NRC-00 NSAE-00 OES-00 
 OIC-00 NIMA-00 PA-00 GIWI-00 PRS-00 P-00 FMPC-00 
 SP-00 IRM-00 SSO-00 SS-00 STR-00 TRSE-00 DSCC-00 
 PRM-00 DRL-00 G-00 SAS-00 SWCI-00 /001W
 ------------------E81042 021449Z /38 
FM AMEMBASSY GABORONE
TO SECSTATE WASHDC 2038
INFO SOUTHERN AFRICAN DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY
NSC WASHDC
HQ USEUCOM VAIHINGEN GE
C O N F I D E N T I A L GABORONE 000600 

SIPDIS


DEPT FOR AF/S DIFFILY

E.O. 12958: DECL: 05/01/2015
TAGS: PHUM PGOV BC
SUBJECT: CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT FALLS SHORT OF TRIBAL
EQUALITY

REF: A. GABORONE 56


B. GABORONE 162

Classified By: AMBASSADOR JOSEPH HUGGINS FOR REASONS 1.4 B AND D

C O N F I D E N T I A L GABORONE 000600

SIPDIS


DEPT FOR AF/S DIFFILY

E.O. 12958: DECL: 05/01/2015
TAGS: PHUM PGOV BC
SUBJECT: CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT FALLS SHORT OF TRIBAL
EQUALITY

REF: A. GABORONE 56


B. GABORONE 162

Classified By: AMBASSADOR JOSEPH HUGGINS FOR REASONS 1.4 B AND D


1. (C) Summary: The GOB has proposed a so-called "tribal
neutrality" bill that would amend Botswana's constitution
to broaden representation in the House of Chiefs, the
largely symbolic second chamber of parliament through which
traditional leaders advise the National Assembly. Well over
a decade in coming, the amendment would do little to
establish
parity of status among various ethnic groups in that body.
One controversial provision of the bill would empower the
President to appoint five new members to the House of Chiefs.

The amendment would also eliminate a clause that allowed the
state to grant special access to "defined areas" for the San,
on which the First People of the Kalahari has based its
challenge to the GOB of their relocation from the Central
Kalahari Game Reserve. This bill reflects two hallmarks of
the ruling Botswana Democratic Party's approach to
governance:
promoting Botswana as a modern democracy based in part on the
assimilation of marginalized communities into the mainstream
of society and preserving and extending the power of the
executive. End Summary.

--------------
17 YEARS COMING, 90 DAYS TO GO
--------------


2. (U) Botswana's National Assembly is considering a
constitutional amendment nominally aimed at establishing
"tribal neutrality" regarding representation of Botswana's
various tribes in the House of Chiefs, the largely symbolic
second chamber of parliament that advises the National
Assembly. The context of the issue is the historical
status of the Setswana-speaking clusters -- the Bamangwato,
the Bangwaketse, the Bakwena, the Bakgatla, the Batlokwa,
the Bamalete, the Barolong, and the Batawana -- whom the
British colonizers recognized as having paramount chiefs.
First raised in Parliament in 1988, the proposal to make the
constitution "tribally neutral" was the subject of a
Presidential (Balopi) Commission in 2000, the report of
which generated a number of recommendations that inform the
current amendment bill. Having completed a third reading in
the National Assembly, the bill has entered a ninety-day
waiting period for the purpose of further consultation.

After ninety days, the bill will come before parliament
again, at which time parliament could make amendments before
voting on it.

--------------
EXPANDED REPRESENTATION IN HOUSE OF CHIEFS
--------------


3. (U) The central provision of the bill would more than
double the size of the House of Chiefs to 35 seats. The bill
would retain the ex-officio seats for the eight so-called
"major" Tswana tribes and four members from Chobe, Ghanzi,
Kgalagadi and the Northeast who are elected by the
traditional
leaders in each area. It would add up to twenty members to
be
elected by an electoral college consisting of traditional
leaders in each of twenty regions around the country and five
members appointed by the President.


4. (U) While this change is likely to increase
representation
of non-Tswana groups in the House of Chiefs, that outcome is
not
guaranteed. Each of the twenty regions includes communities
with
various tribal affiliations, some Tswana and some not.
Currently,
when communities elect a headman, he must be approved by the
paramount chief (a Tswana) over that area before he becomes
eligible for a salary. These paid headmen would constitute
the
electoral college in each region, chaired by a "senior
government
official appointed by the Minister responsible for local
government", which would elect a representative to the House
of
Chiefs. In contrast, the paramount chiefs of the eight
dominant
Tswana tribes are guaranteed seats in the House of Chiefs

SIPDIS
although


their constituencies are also ethnically diverse.

-------------- ---
HOUSE OF CHIEFS REJECTS PRESIDENTIAL APPOINTMENT
-------------- ---


5. (C) After deliberations on the amendment bill, the House
of
Chiefs rejected the provision allowing the President to
appoint
five new members. In a conversation with PolOff, Chairman of
the
House of Chiefs Kgosi Seepapitso expressed his colleagues'
"suspicion" when they discovered the addition of this
provision
to the bill. (This provision was not in the previous
incarnation
of the bill which died when the President dissolved the
eighth
parliament in preparation for elections in October 2004.)
Kgosi
Seepapitso feared that the President would use this power to
reward partisan cronies in the same way that he used
nominations
for specially elected Members of Parliament and appointments
to
local councils (REF A).


6. (C) Kgosi Seepapitso admitted that the Government can
"take
or leave" the advice of the chiefs, but asserted that they
leave
it "at their peril." Chiefs, he said, can mobilize their
constituents against politicians who have defied their
wishes.
If the amendment passes and the chiefs disapprove of the
President's appointments to the House, a new rift could
emerge
in the foundation of the Botswana Democratic Party's power
base,
alienating some traditional leaders from the ruling party.

--------------
ELIMINATING SPECIAL TREATMENT FOR THE SAN
--------------


7. (U) One of the most controversial aspects of the
constitutional
amendment bill is its deletion of Section 14, Subsection 3,
Paragraph C. This clause granted the Government the right to
restrict entry to and residence within "defined areas" for
"persons
who are not Bushmen" in order to ensure "the protection or
well-
being of the Bushmen." (Note: Many now consider 'Bushmen' a
pejorative term. The words 'San' or 'Basarwa' are generally
used
instead. End Note.) First People of the Kalahari, a San
organization, released a statement criticizing the
Government's
intention to amend the constitution by removing a clause upon
which
its legal challenge of their relocation from the Central
Kalahari
Game Reserve (CKGR) is based (REF B). The Government has
been at pains
to emphasize that the repeal of Section 14.3.C would not be
retroactive
and, therefore, would not impact the outcome of their case.
Furthermore, the Government argued that it never established
defined
areas in which only San could reside. (Note: Non-San,
particularly
Bakgaladi, lived within the CKGR and no law or regulation
limited
access to the CKGR exclusively to the San. End Note.)


8. (U) The Government interpreted Section 14.3.C as
discriminatory and
contrary to national unity. A contact at the Office of the
President
indicated that in addition to its objection to the term
"Bushmen", the
GOB found the special treatment of a specific group
discriminatory to
all other Batswana. The Government cannot limit the access
of San or
any other citizens from any other region in order to
safeguard the
interests of its existing residents, he observed, so why do


so for the
San? By eliminating this clause, he concluded, the GOB
intended to
uphold the principle of tribal equality. According to the
GOB, Section
14.3.C reflected a concept of protection contrary to its
policy of
integrating remote area dwellers into the rest of society.

--------------
OPPOSITION, NGOS NOT SATISFIED
--------------


9. (U) Opposition politicians and human rights organizations
have
denounced the bill as failing to address the problem of
tribal
inequality. RETENG, a Botswana NGO that has championed the
rights of
minority ethnic groups, pointed out that the bill does
nothing to
address the lack of mother-tongue education, communal group
land
rights, or Government recognition of chiefs for non-Tswana
minorities. An April 18 press release by Ditshwanelo, the
Botswana
Center for Human Rights, lamented that the amendment ignored
the
existence of racial discrimination against the San. The
Chair of
the UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination
expressed its view that the bill fails to accord equal
representation
for ethnic groups which are subordinate to a dominant tribe.
Government Ministers have acknowledged that this bill is
"imperfect"
but describe it as a viable compromise that represents a step
in the
right direction.

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


10. (SBU) Expansion of the House of Chiefs is a welcome
development
insofar as it is likely to increase representation of
minorities in
that body. The amendment bill does not change the fact,
however, that
certain tribes (the eight Tswana tribes) are guaranteed a
seat in the
House and others (non-Tswana tribes) are not.


11. (SBU) Contrary to allegations by Survival International,
the
proposed amendment would not subvert or circumvent the
judicial
process with regard to the case of the First People of the
Kalahari
against the GOB. Since Section 14.3.C was part of the
constitution
when the relocation occurred, the judges will evaluate
whether that
policy violated the constitution as it existed at that time.
Moreover, this clause did not guarantee the San access to the
CKGR.
It did, however, imply the need for the Government to protect
the
interests of this marginalized minority by securing their
access to
land. Repealing this clause signifies the Government's
rejection
of the argument that preserving the rights of the San
requires the
recognition of the CKGR as a San homeland. Instead, it
reflects the
Government's proclaimed strategy of overcoming poverty among
the San
by assimilating them into the mainstream of Botswana society
rather
than insulating them geographically, economically and
culturally.
HUGGINS


NNNN