Botswana has become highly charged politically. As a democracy we are still struggling with weak institutions and strong personalities. One institution which if not guarded may become weakened together with its leadership, is the kgotla.
However, the kgotla and the kgosi must be shielded from political interests. It is only natural that politicians, whether opposition or those of the ruling party will want to gain some political mileage from the services of the kgotla. However it is important that the kgotla remains untainted from party politics.
Tribesmen and women as well as tribal leadership must be careful not to surrender the kgotla to political influence. The kgosi must also be careful not to surrender himself or herself to political manipulation.
Two recent issues relating to this subject are worrying. One is the declaration of teachers as essential services, while the second one is the demand of unions to be heard in the kgotla.
I was intrigued by the rhetoric around the declaration of teachers as essential services. The government spin doctors argued that following an extensive consultation with the chiefs, through the Ntlo ya dikgosi, dikgosi were concerned that the children’s education was not protected from strike action.
They argued that declaring teachers essential services was therefore approved and endorsed by dikgosi in the realization of the importance of education. What was absent from the communiqu├® was what the unions or teachers had to say or thought about such classification. Interestingly, the minister under whom labour falls, Hon. Peter Siele, was away in Europe when the classification was undertaken. It therefore appears that the decision was made for the minister responsible as well as for the unions and employees affected. Who made the decision then? Does it really matter these days?
What is interesting is how dikgosi were used. Who has ever heard of dikgosi being consulted in the classification of any cartel as essential service? Why is that their views mattered so much this time around such that the government had to state so clearly in the media that the classification had the blessing of chiefs? We are certainly not a feudal society…or am I wrong? The answer seems to lie in the government communication strategy.
The government appears to be terribly aware that its justification for declaring teachers essential services may be unbelievable or weak. To appeal to the authority of traditional leaders therefore was purely intended to strengthen the government’s message. Now that is interesting since traditional leaders are generally never consulted on matters of classifying anyone essential service.
However, where there is a battle for ideas, sometimes it is essential to appeal to those who appear to have greater credibility than yourself, so that you may gain credibility by association. In this case there is a clear instance of exploitation of traditional institutions for political gain.
Batswana still have very strong tribal/ethnic associations. Since generally chiefs are perceived as politically neutral, to argue that they supported the designation of a sector as essential services makes such a statement more credible, than if it were only from a political establishment.
Increasingly, the kgotla is being used to fight political battles. Recently, unions wanted to have access to the kgotla to explain to the villagers their side of the story ÔÇô which would be fair.
We were informed that chiefs were instructed not to receive them. Many dikgotla around the country followed the orders and denied the unions space to articulate their matters in the kgotla. In a community where there is a battle of ideas both sides must be heard for people to make informed decisions on what is credible or not. There is a Setswana idiomatic expression which says: mmualebe o bua la gagwe; gore monalentle a tle a le tswe. It is informative that the Setswana expression doesn’t say: monalentle o bua la gagwe; gore mmualebe a tle a le tswe. What the idiom does is front that which may be socially unacceptable to demonstrate the traditional Setswana spirit of neelano ÔÇô the mutual exchange of ideas regardless of an inferior view.
The Setswana cultural setup has always flourished on public debates ÔÇô people were offered time and space by their leaders to articulate their views without fear of a backlash. There are many other idiomatic expressions which demonstrate the centrality of freedom of expression within the Setswana community, regardless of the quality of an opinion or an idea. One other important idiomatic expression is the saying that kgosi thotobolo o olela matlakala.
The idiom articulates the right of those with an inferior position to be heard by those in leadership. However when the government insisted that unions should be unwelcomed in the kgotla, it was violating a long held tradition that all ideas and views are welcome in the kgotla. The move was also counter the democratic national ideals since it was limiting an expression of ideas which may be unpopular with government. It is not that the kgotla was unsuitable for strike discourse as His Excellency the President of Botswana discussed strike matters at the Natale kgotla, Borolong and Motokwe kgotla.
What the government attempted to do was deny those with a different view access to the kgotla. Strangely, before long, ministers were running away from the angry mobs in kgotla gatherings across the country, or as in the case of Ramotswa, they found the kgotla virtually empty without the kgosi and area MP.
The kgotla and the kgosi are an important part of Botswana’s social fabric. As much as it is possible, they should remain uncorrupted by party politics for the village comprises a tapestry of political opinions, which though varied, should not be allowed to divide the unity of the village. The independence of the kgotla and kgosi should therefore not be sacrificed for brief political gains.
