Elections have come and gone. By and large the independent observe rs have declared that the Botswana elections were free and fair.
There are many issues that however still divide the nation when it comes to the conduct and operations of our elections.
The first and perhaps most glaring is the abuse of incumbency by the Botswana Democratic Party.
Everywhere in the world it is accepted that incumbency brings with it certain previleges.
This is because existing side by side with those are attendant obligations and responsibilities on the incumbent.
But for a contender to get such infinite access to state resources against others simply because he is incumbent is hardly a privilege that comes with incumbency.
There is need for a sober national debate on leveling the playing field.
And this is not in anywhere limited to the use of state aircraft by the ruling Botswana Democratic Party under the guise that it is part of presidential transport previleges.
It also should extend to state media.
The BDP itself should start internalizing the simple fact that its excessive abuse of the state media is beginning to hurt it much more than its serving it.
On matters attaining to the government and indeed the BDP the truth is that the public no longer believes the state media even when what the state is saying about the BDP might be true.
It is a backlash that can very easily be traced to abuse and manipulation.
It reached its apex during the general elections when president Ian Khama’s campaign was given much more coverage visavis other party leaders.
But it is the Independent Electoral Commission that we want to talk about.
Reforms of the IEC should most importantly take into consideration and embrace technology advances made since the electoral law was first drafted.
The law should also be evaluated with the opinion of further granting IEC more executive powers.
Those powers we are worried still reside with either the PSP or the President.
It is our view that an incumbent president should be detached from the electoral preparations of the IEC, if not for anything then at least for the fact that he is an interested party.
Detaching the president from the process should in our view include taking away from him the powers to be the exclusive repository of authority that determines setting the date for general elections.
The date of elections should very clearly be explicit in the law.
The same powers should be taken away from the Minister of Local Government in as far as they pertain to determining the date for by-elections for example.
Such powers we contend should be handed over to the chairman of the IEC who shall act on the advice of the IEC chief executive and also assisted by the constitution of the country.
Mistakes that plagued the IEC handling of pre-poll elections could resolved by making IEC more transparent.
We also call on security of tenure as well as term limit for IEC chief executive.
Staying too long in that too powerful position can be dangerous to other interests, especially those of opposition parties.
Security of tenure is important in so far as it guarantees that the person will not be bullied by appointing authorities who in this instance have a clear interest in the outcome of the elections.
