Botswana’s Court of Appeal hands down unanimous judgment affirming decriminalisation of same-sex relationships; Proposed amendments seek to provide oversight to interception of communications; Whistleblowing Act failing to protect expression
PRESS STATEMENT : DECRIMINALIZATION JUDGEMENT— Lesbians, Gays and Bisexuals of Botswana -LEGABIBO (@legabiboadvo) November 29, 2021
Today, the Botswana Court of Appeal, through Judge President Ian Kirby, issued a monumental judgement to decriminalize consensual sex between same-sex partners. #DecrimBotswana #BeyondTheRainbow #ReBatswana pic.twitter.com/wOOqFrGepD
Landmark court judgment decriminalises same sex relationships
In November 2021, Botswana’s Court of Appeal handed down a unanimous judgment in the matter of Attorney General v Motshidiemang, where same-sex relationships were decriminalised. This was an appeal that was brought by the government, in seeking to challenge the 2019 ruling of the High Court that criminalising homosexuality was unconstitutional.
Since judgment was handed down, President Masisi has made a commitment that the government will fully abide by the decision of the Court of Appeal.
As a result of the recent ruling, Botswana now becomes the fifth country in Africa to decriminalise same sex relationships. Other countries that have taken such measures include: Angola, Mozambique, Lesotho and Seychelles. South Africa remains the first and only African country to legalise same-sex marriage, with a constitution that also protects against discrimination based on sexual orientation.
Civil society actors from across the region have commended the decision of the Court of Appeal and expressed how the judiciary in the country has set a great precedent in protecting and promoting the human rights of every person. Nonetheless, the Southern Africa Litigation Centre has also said that there remains a need to reform Section 167 of the Penal Code, which the Court of Appeal did not address in its judgment since the applicant did not explicitly raise this section. According to Section 167, acts of gross indecency, whether performed in public or in private, and whether consensual remain criminalised. To the extent that it criminalises consensual sexual activities in private, such a provision should be amended because it indirectly prohibits sexual intimacy between lesbian couples.
Whistleblowing Act failing to protect expression
Responding to questions posed by Parliamentarians, on 21st March 2022, Botswana assistant Minister for Presidential Affairs, Governance and Public Administration, Dumezweni Mthimkhulu, conceded that the Whistleblowing Act of 2016 does not fully guarantee the protection of those who are fighting against corruption in the country. The legislation, which was adopted in 2016, aims, amongst other things, to provide for the protection against victimisation of persons who make disclosure on corruption related issues. In providing an analysis on the shortcomings of the Act, Mthimkhulu observed how the scope of the application is broadly focused on public entities, while there is a narrow application on the conduct of private entities.
Furthermore, the current legislative framework does not afford protection to anonymous reporters. In terms of the United Nations Convention Against Corruption, which Botswana has ratified, State Parties should take measures that allow members of the public to report anonymously on any issues that are considered as an offence, in accordance with the Convention. In closing, Mthimkhulu admitted that the Act needs to be amended in order to ensure the full protection of whistle-blowers.
Proposed amendments seek to provide oversight to interception of communications
In February 2022 the government of Botswana tabled amendments to the Criminal Procedure and Evidence (Controlled Investigation) Bill of 2022. This was in response to some sections of the Act which received criticism from various civil society actors in the country and from many parts of the world. The parts of the Bill that caused concerns referred to expanding the powers of the government to intercept communications without a warrant or public oversight under certain conditions. Furthermore, the Bill also made provision for forced disclosure of information to the State intelligence and law enforcement agencies under certain circumstances. This raised serious criticism for the effective work of journalists and the protection of freedom of expression in the country.
The certificate of urgency under which the Bill was debated in Parliament was also disputed because it meant that the Act would be expedited and the public would not get a chance to give inputs.
The Bill now sits before a parliamentary Committee for further deliberations.
Freedom of association is coming under threat in Botswana due to the overreach of the state security agency, the Directorate of Intelligence and Security Services (DISS). Civil society groups in Botswana are critical of DISS’ intrusive intelligence methods that undermine basic rights and create a climate of fear.
Freedom of association is coming under threat in Botswana due to the overreach of the state security agency, the Directorate of Intelligence and Security Services (DISS). Civil society groups in Botswana are critical of DISS’ intrusive intelligence methods that undermine basic rights and create a climate of fear. Trade unions, political parties and media organisations all complained – particularly in the run-up to October 2014 elections – about intrusion into their affairs.Freedom of association received a boost in November 2014 following a High Court ruling ordering government to register The Lesbians, Gays and Bisexuals of Botswana (LEGABIBO), an NGO promoting the rights of sexual minorities. The court said government’s refusal to register LEGABIBO was unlawful because it ‘violated the applicants’ rights to freedom of expression, freedom of association and freedom of assembly’. Not backing down, the government has subsequently appealed this ruling to the Court of Appeal.
While freedom of assembly is largely respected in Botswana, groups with opposing views have noted government interference. For example, the government prevented some organisations from entering the Central Kalahari Game Reserve and broke up demonstrations aimed at raising awareness about the indigenous residents of that area.
While freedom of assembly is largely respected in Botswana, groups with opposing views have noted government interference. For example, the government prevented some organisations from entering the Central Kalahari Game Reserve and broke up demonstrations aimed at raising awareness about the indigenous residents of that area. Civil society groups have also exercised their right to assemble and communicate views about human rights abuses taking place internationally. Recent protests aimed at raising awareness on abuses in Zimbabwe and the Gaza Strip proceeded without hindrance, with the relevant ministers accepting petitions. However, strikes by civil servants are generally frowned upon by the government.
Despite constitutional protections, free speech is under threat in Botswana following a series of attacks on critical media. In January 2015 the website of prominent daily Mmegi was hacked and 12 years of archives deleted.
Despite constitutional protections, free speech is under threat in Botswana following a series of attacks on critical media. In January 2015 the website of prominent daily Mmegi was hacked and 12 years of archives deleted. The attack allegedly originated from the Directorate of Intelligence and Security Services (DISS). In May 2015, police raided the offices of the Botswana Gazette and arrested three staff members. The newspaper had published an article that accused the intelligence services of being involved in corrupt deals with a Zambian national. The president told a gathering in 2013 that government would be willing to sponsor defamation cases of cabinet ministers against the media. There is no access to information law in Botswana. Civil society organisations however have worked with opposition parties to draft a Freedom of Information Bill which remains pending due to lack of political will. In a move seemingly designed to increase pressure on private media, government authorities allegedly withdrew their advertising revenue to these outlets.