In the struggle to articulate the term “Batswana” amongst the many ethnic tribal groupings found in the country, an attempt to demarcate the parameters of inclusion into the nation as an equal and legitimate representative has been made, the purpose of which was purported to have been nation building.
As to whether that has been achieved is subject to further debate. While on the other hand the founders claim it was premised on tolerance of a certain degree of diversity, what is prevalent is a regime that has a tendency to impose hegemonic big brother attitude over minorities. Or even Majorities. Of course, the very notion of tolerance is constitutive of an imaginary in which the social comprises a network of hierarchically organized social differences that mark the boundaries between the majority and the minority.
We are living under false pretenses in a world of tension where there is absolutely no tolerance at all that could serve as a central pillar in a network of power knowledge under writing strategies for the governance and representation of heterogeneous populations.
In Botswana politics has been unkind to the institution of Bogosi.
The government must come clear as to whether it really takes the institution serious or not.
In 1970, Kgosi Neale Sechele was compelled to resign as Chief of the Bakwena following a two-man commission appointed by President Sir Seretse Khama to look into alleged negligence of duty and abuse of alcohol leveled against the Kgosi. Last year in 2010, a team consisting of former Ministers and Speakers of Parliament Matlapeng Ray Molomo and Patrick Balopi together with a Ngwato royal Sediegeng Kgamane and former Police Commissioner and Kweneng native Simon Hirstchfeld were commissioned by President Ian Khama (Seretse’s son) to probe into the troubles of Kweneng District, particularly the factional tussles in the Bakwena royal family. The commission did not impress many people, a situation that compelled Mohumagadi Kgosiemang to caution Kgosi Kgari III that he should have let Bakwena resolve their own problems as opposed to bringing in Ian Khama to do it for them. She reminded him of the 1970 debacle where Neale Sechele was compelled to abdicate Bogosi and summed it up by saying ‘Noga e Tsala Nogana’ (‘a snake begets a small snake’), literally cautioning Kgosi Kgari to be careful in his dealings with Khama.
In 1973, Kgosi Seepapitso IV was suspended for one year because he was purported to have on several occasions behaved in a manner deemed unbecoming for a Kgosi and was perceived as a poor performer in the execution of his chieftaincy functions. In 1977, Sir Seretse Khama’s administration dismissed Kgosi Besele II of Barolong for dereliction of duty. Earlier in 1969, Kgosi Bathoen II of Bangwaketse was compelled by law to quit bogosi in order to pursue a political career on an opposition Botswana National Front (BNF) ticket. The poor Kgosi Bathoen had to trade in his leopard skin for politics. Kgosi Tawana Moremi of Batawana suffered the same fate, as he had to live his father’s Kgotla to join politics. However in sharp contrast to this image, Sir Seretse Khama in 1979, appointed his son Ian Khama (then a Brigadier in the army), Kgosi of the Bangwato tribal while still serving in the army. By so doing Sir Seretse Khama set up a very bad precedent that inculcated a sense of entitlement and prestige to the young brigadier. The ceremony took place at the Bangwato’s main kgotla in Serowe, the government owned Kutlwano magazine of this period has a photo of Ian Khama clad in military tunic bringing firewood to the kgotla.
It must be noted that Seretse Khama installed Ian Khama as Kgosi of the Bangwato despite an undertaking by Seretse and his uncle, Tshekedi, made in the mid-1950s that they were abdicating chieftaincy of the Bangwato for themselves and their children.
To this day President Ian Khama remains the only politician in Botswana who is also a paramount chief, thus flouting a precedent that was set by Kgosi Bathoen II. This was after Bathoen II had routed Marquette Joni Ketumile Masire in the 1969 elections on an opposition Botswana National Front ticket. President Ian Khama enjoys special privileges to wear two hats of being a politician and Kgosi contrary to constitutional provisions. Despite this abuse, Khama often brags about being Kgosi of Bangwato and President of the Republic of Botswana in his political rallies. He has also gone on record to tease those that have called for comprehensive constitutional review by stating that ‘people think it is fashionable to call for constitutional review’ …. ‘Tsone di tsaya gore di motlhofo go di chencha constitution’.
In asserting its authority over the Chiefs, the government has sought to make them agents of the state administration and have in consequence become employees of the public service. Kgosi Linchwe II of the Bakgatla -ba- Kgafela in 1978 challenged this set up and stated in the House of Chiefs that a Chief is not a civil servant. Kgosi Seepapitso II of Bangwaketse reiterated the statement and stated that ‘just because chiefs receive a salary from government, they are not civil servants ….. And so it is wrong of us to entertain the idea that chiefs are civil servants’ (Jones 1983).
The Chieftainship Act of 1966 conned the Chiefs to the authority of the state as well as adumbrating their functions in the tribe. Of particular significance was the authority which is vested in the President to recognize the designation of the Chief by the tribe and to suspend and dispose him following a judicial commission of enquiry. Subsequent legislation substantially consolidated the power of the President and the responsible Cabinet Minister. The Chieftainship (Amendment) Act of 1970 removed the right of a Chief to a judicial enquiry before his suspension or deposition by the President. Under the Chieftainship (Amendment) Act of 1973, the President was to determine the nature of administrative enquiry preceding his judgment on the removal of a chief from office and such an enquiry could be instigated without there being, as was previously the case, a complaint from the tribe about the conduct of a Chief.
At some seminar held in 1971, the late Englishman Kgabo stated that chieftainship would no longer be a birth-right but a job like any other public office. Subsequent to Kgabo statement there was a legal case involving Kgosi Seepapitso IV of Bangwaketse in 1972 and the Chief Justice C J Aguda ruled that recognition was synonymous with appointment there by confirming the claim by Kgabo that persons are no longer born to these positions but appointed to them. Again in 1978 the late Lemme Makgekgenene reiterated Kgabo’s statement, and stated that ‘Chiefs are Civil Servants like any other civil servants’. In 2008, there was yet another amendment to Bogosi Act that sort to resolve the impasse between the two institutions.
The traditional authority set up in Botswana is such that the Chief does not rule and make decisions all by himself. He has his uncles (‘Council of Elders’) who serve as a central structure guided by the cardinal principle of “balance” (through representation by all sections of the community). This system is indeed akin to the present-day cabinet under the liberal-democratic system of governance.
The chieftaincy institution in Botswana is evolving and has to be protected from abuse and misuse by politicians and their hangers-on.
It is time for Dikgosi to realize that those of them holding political office contrary to constitutional provisions are not in any way superior. They are all equals. As married, experienced and educated men, they need not be divided by self-serving politicians. They should be aware that in times of hardships, certain individuals including their own tribesmen will be used to try and divide them by spreading malicious gossip and blatant lies.
Finally they must just know that Botswana is simply not a kingdom. Ga batho ba paletswe ke bogosi ba kwa ga bone ba seka ba senyetsa merafe e mengwe, ka go batlela ka di tribal authority. This they should know all the time.
*Thabo Lucas Seleke, writes from Boston, MA, USA
