As both the ruling party and opposition legislators gear up for the budget session of parliament, party functionaries and enthusiasts of parliamentary debates are also readying themselves for the usual rowdy and shrill exchanges that characterize our parliament sessions.
As usual, the ruling Botswana Democratic Party (BDP) MPs are expected to passionately defend just anything tabled before parliament by an unrestrained, defiant executive.
On the other hand, opposition legislators are expected to show courage and save the image of the so-called supreme law-making body by providing oversight and demanding the executive to account while also seeking to get publicity from their ranting.
For the reason that public interest in parliamentary debates has soared to unprecedented levels, a good number of MPs see parliament sessions as an opportunity to play to the gallery with the hope of attracting the attention of voters in the mistaken belief that sloganeering, disrupting proceedings and a public display of unruliness and generally behaving like privileged thugs is a measure of political representation.
It is a hard fact that a good number of MPs now spend much of their time in parliament engaging in useless heated arguments about themselves and their bodies.
Interruptions are too frequent, silly and unmeritable while the tone of civility has been thrown out through the window as our political elites speak at the same time like experimental beings that escaped from the lab.
Yet, the 12th Parliament of the Republic of Botswana happens to have some of the decently learned politicians Botswana ever had.
On this account and based on past public sentiments that Botswana parliament was failing in its oversight and accountability role, the caliber of men and women comprising the 12th Parliament gave some hope that parliament was going to affirm its supremacy.
The expectation was that our learned parliamentarians were going to use their decent brains to engage in quality research, in order to critique proposed legislation and challenge executive decisions that would otherwise harm the ordinary Motswana.
Thus, in the recent past our past parliament lackluster performance has been blamed on the quality of our political representatives across the party line in as much as it was blamed on the ruling party parliamentarians’ fear of then President Ian Khama.
However, as was the case with the 11th Parliament there are still media reports of MPs who has a habit of idling outside when parliament is in session, whose role in parliament seems to be limited to heckling, collapsing the quorum, disrupting debates and laughing at anything including laughing at their own shadows.
It is also worth remembering that a few years ago the then Speaker of the National Assembly, Mma Kokorwe acknowledged that it was painful to watch MPs walk out of Parliament against her word.
This was after former Maun West MP Tawana Moremi had reminded her that she had no powers to force MPs into the house even when they idle outside and then later submit their claims for sitting allowance.
Years back when some MPs complained that the president hardly attended parliamentary sessions, President Khama retorted that parliamentary sessions clashed with his gym activities forcing him to choose between his beloved hobby over the irrelevant parliament.
Various scholars such as Professors Sebudubudu, Botlhale, Maripe and many other researchers have highlighted the defects of Botswana’s parliament falling short of dismissing it as an absolute disgrace.
Sebudubudu and his colleagues called it a mere registration chamber (registry office) mainly because it has degenerated into a rubberstamp of the decisions of the executive.
Perhaps this is the context under which parliament adopted a motion in 1988 requesting government (the very executive that does not take parliament seriously) to take steps to ensure that parliament is removed from the Office of the President in order that it became an independent institution.
As a matter of routine, this motion was left to gather dust somewhere in the higher echelons of power perhaps to demonstrate that parliament resolutions are just like hollow new-year resolutions that are not meant to be acted upon.
Subsequently, in 2002 the then Speaker of the National Assembly, Mr Ray Molomo initiated a consultancy on the independence of parliament. Of the various recommendations made by the consultants, two indisputably attracted the widest publicity
The consultants recommended that there was a need to better define the functions of parliament noting that parliament lacked a clear statement of its roles and functions in spite of its being regarded as the supreme law-making body.
Except that this time the revelation was coming from independent consultants, there was really nothing new or seminal about this conclusion and recommendations. Many scholars and researchers have repeatedly expressed that our parliament was merely ceremonial, a ritualistic act of political fraud.
The other notable recommendation related to the need for parliament to have power to ratify the appointment of and removal from office of certain key personnel such as the Ombudsman, Director General of Corruption and Economic Crime and so forth.
Again, as a matter of routine the executive was widely expected to and did ignore the report of the consultants in order to ensure maintenance of the status quo and further affirm that our parliament was just an over glorified talk shop whose speaker cannot even enforce attendance of members.
Also peeved by the lack of powers by parliament relative to the executive, subsequent Speakers of the National Assembly have attempted to reform parliament in order to give it the necessary bite to check the activities of government.
For instance, Margret Nasha commissioned a task force on the independence of parliament in 2010. As usual, the task force made intelligent recommendations that also turned out to have no force and effect.
Perhaps in underscoring the insignificance and/or irrelevance of our parliament in Botswana’s national politics, writing in his book ‘Democratic Deficit in the Parliament of Botswana’, former speaker of the National Assembly documents that parliament is no more than a doormat of the executive – a puppet house.
Nevertheless, when MPs are in parliament they debate issues as if parliament is taken seriously as an important organ of the state in as much as citizens accord it the respect befitting a vital component of an indispensable machine.
However, the attitude of MPs towards parliament says it all. Most MPs have the slightest respect for parliament and this has contributed significantly to the overall public perception that parliamentary business is just a ritual undertaking to complete the puzzle of an amusement show called democracy.
This attitude actually has been worsening since the Office of the Attorney General told parliament that parliamentary resolutions are not binding on the executive. Through this missive, the Attorney General did put MPs in their place, deflated their egos and rendered parliament a sacred venue for our political elites to release their stress.
It is no wonder that many of our legislators have sought refuse on social media where they spend an inordinate amount of time posting thrash and sharing pictures of events they officiated in order to get some reassurance about their position in society.
Thus, most have resorted to using social media for reassurance and validation after realizing that parliament was just a spoof, a dysfunctional house whose irrelevance has long been confirmed by parliamentary counsels, past and current speakers of parliament and MPs themselves.
When in 2007 then President Festus Mogae likened outspoken MPs to diphokwana (trying to impress merobana (nannies), he may have been very crude but he was merely demonstrating, in very strong words, the miserable standing of MPs and parliament in the real world of Botswana politics.
To this end, a lot of efforts have been made to create an independent parliament but such efforts have been frustrated by the executive and the attitude of the executive towards parliament would not be changing anytime soon.
Thus, rather than pretend to be important, powerful and authoritative, MPs should made it a habit to complain about parliament’s lack of independence at every session so that the executive is not given space to sit on this crucial matter.
The much anticipated Commission of Inquiry into the review of the Botswana Constitution gave hope that at last an opportunity has been availed to strengthen parliament for enhanced oversight and accountability.
Yet, in what the Dibotelo Commission consider to be a progressive arrangement, it has recommended the establishment of a Ministry of Parliamentary Affairs in what seems to be a case of relocating people from a squatter settlement to a shanty town, the difference only being that the other squatter camp has ‘town’ in its name. Essentially, it means that nothing is about to change in respect of the independence of parliament. For this reason, it is suggested that MPs should vigorously lobby the movers and shakers in society especially those closer to the ruling elite to put in a good word for the need to have an independent parliament.
