Constitution and political system
- Constitution - adopted March 1965
- Legal system - based on Roman-Dutch law; local customary law in rural areas
- Legislative branch - bicameral Parliament consists of House of Chiefs (15 advisory member body), and the National Assembly (44 seats)
- Elections - last held October 1999 (legislative)
History
Botswana has been a multiparty parliamentary democracy since independence in 1966. The rule of law has generally been respected, though certain exceptions to this have been noted in recent years. Though it is a democracy, Botswana’s political system also incorporates a degree of potential authoritarianism, which depends very much on the use the president chooses to make of his extensive powers.
Elections for a unicameral National Assembly occur every five years. This body then elects the president. President Ketumile Masire retired more than a year before the expiry of his fourth term, and was replaced by Festus Mogae, previously his deputy. A constitutional amendment passed in 1997 made provision for the deputy-president to succeed to the presidency automatically in the event of that office falling vacant between elections.
There is also a 15-member House of Chiefs, which has advisory powers only. There is currently some debate as to whether this institution serves any useful purpose, but given the ruling party’s dependence on its rural support base no immediate change to the staus quo is anticipated.
The constitution may be amended in minor ways by a simple majority vote in parliament. More substantial amendments require a two-thirds majority, and major revisions have to be submitted to a referendum.
Current political situation
Since independence the government has pursued policies generally regarded as sound and fiscally conservative. The state provides successfully for the health and education needs of almost all its people, despite adverse climatic conditions and vast distances. Government has never been ashamed to call in expatriate experts to strengthen its administrative structures, which also shows a degree of maturity and self-confidence.
There has been a significant realignment and reorganization of political parties during the past decade. The principal political parties at the 1994 election were the Botswana Democratic Party (BDP), which has ruled the country since independence in 1967 and took 54% of the vote, securing 27 seats plus 4 nominated; the Botswana National Front (BNF), led by Kenneth Koma, which took 37% of the vote and 13 seats (including all the major urban constituencies), and the Botswana People’s Party (BPP), which won no seats. Since then the BNF has split, partly on ideological/historical lines, but also because of personality differences among the leadership. Koma’s erstwhile deputy, Michael Dingake took over the leadership of the Botswana Congress Party, which was declared the official opposition after it was formed by 11 MPs from the BNF.
As anticipated, the split in the BNF/BCP strengthened the ruling party ahead of the general elections held in October 1999, though pundits were taken by surprise by the relative showings of the opposition parties. The BDP, with 57% of the vote, secured 33 of the elected 40 seats, despite the continued weakness of its support base in the urban areas. Koma’s BNF took 26% of the vote, and 6 seats, and Dingake’s BCP only 12% and 1 seat. The BPP was again unsuccessful in the parliamentary contest, which it fought as part of a new coalition, the Botswana Alliance Movement. The BDP gained another 4 seats by way of nomination, giving it a comfortable majority with a total of 37 of the 44 seats. There is currently some debate on the possibility of introducing a measure of proportional representation into the system, to provide for a more accurate reflection of popular opinion at election time. At present this would not seem to threaten the BDP’s hold on power.
President Mogae is regarded as an able technocrat, very much in the mould of his predecessor, rather than as a forceful and dynamic leader. The sudden entry of Ian Khama, the eldest son of the country’s first president and former head of the armed forces, to the political scene at the elevated level of vice-president raised some eyebrows, but this represented an attempt to reinvigorate of the BDP, and to divert attention from factional power struggles for the leadership as the career politicians saw themselves eclipsed by an outsider. Khama’s appointment and the subsequent granting of a“sabbatical” from 1 January 2000 to settle his traditional affairs as paramount of the BamaNgwato brought considerable criticism and speculation that he had served Mogae’s immediate purposes, by deflecting attention from some potentially dangerous internal factionalism within the BDP. Ironically, however, what may transpire is a realignment of factions now that Khama’s sabbatical was prematurely ended in September 2000 and he has been tasked with overseeing the implementation of the National Development Plan, including the controversial plans for privatization. This gives Ian Khama the power to intervene in the operations of all other ministries, which is unlikely to be accepted with good grace, and could exacerbate intra-party tensions.
The finance and development planning ministry released a document in March 2000 this year setting out its plans for an acceleration in the restructuring of some 30 state-owned enterprises. It explained that privatization would lead to more efficient service delivery, an increase in the country’s growth potential by securing stronger flows of foreign investment and technology transfer and an improvement in the prospects for the domestic business community. Some provision might be made for government to retain a veto power over certain strategic areas.
The draft proposals, however, though supported by cabinet, met with rejection in the National Assembly. Not only is there reluctance to adopt a policy that will cause further unemployment in the short term, but also many Batswana feel that their private economy is already firmly in foreign hands, and see no good reason to exacerbate a situation that they see as promoting the already wide economic and social gulf within their society.
Ian Khama has made no secret of his dislike of the compromises of political life and of his disdain for politicians in general. His authoritarian nature, honed during his time as deputy and later head of the Botswana Defence Force sits ill with many of his cabinet and parliamentary colleagues. His ordering of the BDF to participate in the Lesotho intervention without first consulting parliament raised many hackles. More recently his overbearing attitude was reflected in a semi-public row with the party leadership and its rank-and-file. Khama attacked the party barons as“unprincipled, intolerant, selfish vultures and monkeys”. That Khama’s more populist political style commands a great deal of public support merely adds to the fury of established ministers.
It is possible that President Mogae’s announcement that he intends to serve the two terms allowed him under the constitution is intended to allay fears that Ian Khama could assume the role of head of state as early as 2004. Nevertheless, there are already indications of factional manoeuvrings into pro- and anti-Khama camps within cabinet.
Note: Political information last updated July 2001.
