Category: Sunday Standard

A couple of days ago, our Vice President invited the public to comment on and make suggestions for his upcoming Budget Speech. In an act of citizenship, I also want to offer one or two ideas that the budget should address. So, for whatever it is worth, I offer my thoughts.

The key thing the budget obviously needs to address is revenue and spending. I think the VP or the nation at large needs to make prudent decisions about where the money should go. What should we spend our money on? And here again, I think there should be a broad consensus that we should spend money only on activities or projects that generate positive returns.

And which are those projects? Just to name a few, they would be education and health. I’m struck by the number of people who do not have access to good health care. I was surprised to learn of someone who had to drive all the way from Mogoditshane to Ramotswa to see a dentist.

If ordinary people do not have access to good health care, it has a negative impact. It has a bearing on the ability of people to be productive. It leads to absence from work, which, again, undermines productivity.

Good health care does not always have to be provided by the government. So the government does not have to provide the service directly. This helps the government collaborate with other parties and avoid thinking that it should be doing this directly. It is also true that non-government operators are more efficient than the government.

So, the minister should spend money wisely by partnering with existing private hospitals in the case of education to improve health standards. We should also extend support to mission hospitals, for instance, that we have across the country, while allowing them to maintain their independence.

Well, I’ve spoken about what the VP, who is also the Finance Minister, must do. Let me then turn to what he should not do. He should not make Botswana a high-tax nation anchored on a huge public sector. We are already experiencing an economic slowdown, and we cannot tax our way out of it. The feasible way to grow is to reduce spending, lower our taxes, and allow people to keep as much of their own money as possible in their pockets.

Last year, Nima Sanandaji and Stefan Fölster published a book titled The Welfare State Myth. The book makes for interesting reading, and I recommend it to the VP since he comes across as an avid reader. The book goes against conventional wisdom insofar as the welfare state is concerned. We know that many believe that the state needs not only to be big but must tax people heavily and aggressively in order to provide support to the population. However, Sanandaji and Fölster draw on data to show that ‘it is possible to achieve positive social outcomes without a large state, and that a large state does not guarantee positive social outcomes.’ They cite Singapore and South Korea as examples of countries whose tax burden is not heavy but provides adequate social support.

They also show that the ‘level of unemployment, especially among the less educated, is systematically higher among countries with a higher tax rate. This indicates that generous welfare systems create a poverty trap, characterised by dependency on benefits and high thresholds into the labour market.’

So I urge the VP to note that it is possible to provide social support without ballooning the state and burdening us with more taxes.

Anglo American has warned that it may cut the value of De Beers Mining Company for the third time in as many years, underlining the depth and persistence of the slump facing the global diamond market and renewing uncertainty for Botswana, De Beers’ long-standing partner.

In a statement ahead of its full-year results, Anglo said it is conducting an impairment review of De Beers’ carrying value, citing weak market conditions. The review could result in another write-down, following a $2.9 billion impairment booked last year and a $1.6 billion reduction in 2023.

For Botswana, which owns the remaining 15 percent of De Beers, a further impairment would reinforce concerns about the near-term outlook for a sector that underpins government revenues, foreign exchange earnings and employment. More than $2 billion of De Beers’ value was previously linked to unsold inventory, reflecting sluggish demand in key markets such as China and rising competition from lab-grown diamonds.

De Beers is now valued below the price Anglo paid in 2011 to acquire the Oppenheimer family’s 40 percent stake, highlighting how sharply fortunes have turned for the world’s largest diamond producer.

Anglo has made clear that diamonds are no longer core to its strategy. The group is pursuing options to sell or potentially list De Beers as part of a broader portfolio reset, following last year’s defence against a takeover bid by BHP and as it advances a major transaction with Teck Resources.

Botswana government has previously expressed interest in increasing the country’s stake in De Beers, a prospect that could gain urgency if Anglo proceeds with an exit. However, another write-down would complicate valuation talks, at a time when the diamond market shows few signs of a rapid recovery.

n his first, foot-in-the-mouth incident of 2026, President Duma Boko used part of his podium time to explain the concept of ‘social contract.’ He did so on the basis of public perception that his government is failing to meet its obligations in terms of a ‘social contract’ that the Umbrella for Democratic Change (UDC) entered into with voters in the 2024 general election. To whittle down Boko’s more detailed legalistic definition into digestible bits, a social contract is actually no more than a legally unenforceable gentleman’s agreement. On such basis, government is not legally obliged to deliver on its electoral pledges. As opposed to a social contract, a legal contract is enforceable and more importantly, spells out penalties that a defaulting parties would be subjected to.

While there has been public outrage over Boko’s statement, the fact of the matter is that he was right with regard to how a social contract operates. Thus, the actual problem is not what he said but how democracy works against the interests of voters.

For five or so minutes every five years inside a polling booth, eligible voters get a chance to hire and fire candidates in a general election. The only legal contract they sign is with the Independent Electoral Commission and not the political parties or independent candidates that they vote for. In contract law, there is thus no legally binding agreement between the parties and voters – only a non-binding gentleman’s agreement. The absence of a written agreement means that if the elected parties or candidates don’t deliver on their promises, the only option voters have is casting their vote again in the next election.

Going back to 1966 and only until five years ago, elected officials in MPs and councillors could happily cross the floor between parties. When that happened, voters were helpless precisely because there was no legal contract that compelled these elected officials to remain in the party that they had used to get into office.

An unwritten agreement also gives parties and candidates leeway to reinterpret this agreement by exploiting more loopholes. Perhaps the most perfect example to illustrate the latter point is when former President Mokgweetsi Masisi reinterpreted an electoral promise that the Botswana Democratic Party made ahead of the 2019 elections. Then, the BDP made a non-legally-binding promise to create jobs. After the election and in response to being constantly reminded of that promise, Masisi said that what the party actually meant was that it would create the right economic environment for the private sector to create jobs and not that it would create such jobs itself. A legal contract would have used language very precise regarding who would create such jobs, leaving no room for ambiguity.

There is another set of players in electoral democracy who also expect favourable treatment from the government – oligarchs. Unlike the mass of voters, these players enter into an enforceable legal contract not with voters but the winning party. The wording of this contract is very precise and there are very well-defined penalty clauses. On the basis of the latter, if one party defaults on its legal obligations, it can seek legal recourse, annexing the legal agreement as evidence that it has been cheated out of what it is legally entitled to.

From when the UDC took over the reins of power, the president and his ministers have been signing legal contracts, some a direct result of behind-the-scenes political horse-trading. The horse-trading happened with a unique set of circumstances. Well before elections and far from madding freedom-square crowds, political leaders cut deals with oligarchs about how the latter would give back in return for the funding they got. At this point, there are no legal contracts but there is clear understanding on the part of politicians that, never having been angels, the oligarchs have a variety of means to get revenge if they are cheated. They can collapse an economy, stir up civil disturbance, topple a government by force or assassinate the leader.

It has been credibly alleged that the president of the Democratic Republic of Congo, Laurent Kabila, was assassinated because he went back on a gentleman’s agreement involving the country’s vast mineral wealth that he made with oligarchs. Voters have no leverage because they generally don’t have the means to collapse an economy, stir up civil disturbance, topple a government or assassinate the leader for failure to honour a gentleman’s agreement. Post-election, the gentleman’s agreements are given legal character by signing formal contracts that can be used as evidence in a court of law should the new government fail to deliver on its promises. Whereas political parties deal with voters (through largely through rallies, media and manifestoes) as a mass with no legal character, they deal with each business entity on a one-on-one basis.

On the basis of the latter, it is for oligarchs that democracy works perfectly. However, they also have to maintain the illusion that democracy works for everyone to keep the masses happy and make them feel important when they are really not. The latter explains why entities that these oligarchs control and fund lavishly (media, think tanks, political parties and NGOs) heavily promote the myth of democracy being the best political system. Those who don’t vote are typically characterised as ‘irresponsible’ when it is actually the height of irresponsibility to participate in an elaborate ritual that doesn’t guarantee a positive outcome for you.

Democracy is also attractive for oligarchs because while they can’t capture the millions of voters (a task they have outsourced to politicians), they can easily capture the far fewer political officeholders. As a rule of thumb, these oligarchs are vehemently opposed to genuinely patriotic leaders whose pro-people policies threaten their economic interests and routinely topple such leaders. After failing to oust Brazil’s socialist president, Dilma Rousseff, through elections, the country’s elite power class, including media oligarchs, connived with American corporate interests to topple her through parliament. Assassination is always an option where a leader can’t be captured. Patrice Lumumba of Zaire and Thomas Sankara of Burkina Faso were murdered because their pro-people policies threatened the economic interests of mostly Zionist oligarchs.

Upon conviction that UDC is not a gem diamond they thought it was but a fake diamond hewn from the bottom of a Coke bottle, some voters have already made a firm, anti-UDC resolution for the 2029 general election. The irony is that none of the parties they want to replace UDC with has ever expressed any aversion to electoral democracy as a system of government. The result will be that whatever party replaces UDC will also get into a social contract with voters. That contract, as the UDC’s and the BDP before it, will place no legal obligations on the new government to deliver on its electoral pledges. As the UDC and the BDP before it, the same government will sign legal contracts with oligarchs that the new government delivers on its promises.

Democracy’s main attraction to the Zionist oligarchs who control the world is that that they can manipulate its processes and systems to produce an outcome they want. In that regard, if Burkina Faso were to hold elections, France would easily find puppet opposition leaders whose campaigns it would fund lavishly to enhance their chances of winning. After such leaders win, France would regain control of the country’s vast mineral wealth. For decades, Yoweri Museveni has rigged both the electoral process and the vote and has ruled Uganda with an iron fist. However, he (like Rwanda’s Paul Kagame) is safe because he is facilitating the plunder of the Democratic Republic of Congo’s mineral wealth by western corporations. Museveni just rigged an election in which he literally unleashed terror on his opponent but major western media organisations are not reporting that and no western leader has criticised him.

Holding elections is itself not adequate if the result is a government that is not subservient to western interests. An election which produces a leader that the west can’t control was ‘rigged’ and where western intelligence agencies don’t foment some kind of civil strife, they will connive with local operatives to topple such leader.

Rather obsess over democracy, countries across the globe should be exploring alternatives to it – like the Chinese model. However, they have been duped into believing that democracy is the best system. To their credit, the Zionist sociopaths who control the world through democracy have, through all the powerful institutions and platforms they control, done so good a job in maligning non-democratic systems (that obviously won’t give them backdoor access to a country’s administrative apparatus) that replacing democracy is not even seen as an option.

In the evening of the last Sunday of November, a South African television channel 403 screened a talk show on the topic ‘is entry level in our politics too low?’ The anchor, a certain Dan Moyane had assembled an array of distinguished people of different political groupings and background. They tackled the subject with maturity setting aside their political inclinations as they discussed the topic. Among them, were professors, lawyers, doctors, lecturers and so forth. The only one that I recognized was professor Job Mokgoro who is the former North West Premier. I was able to recognize him because he was instrumental in the appointment of the Commission of Enquiry into the bogosi of Bakgatla-ba-Kgafela in Moruleng, South Africa and its relationship with that of Mochudi in Botswana. At the end of the commission’s job, he posed for a photograph in a happy mood with Kgosi Kgafela II. He was subsequently recalled by the African National Congress (ANC).

Views expressed during the television talk show varied and were very enlightening. Majority were agreed that it was time for their country to set entry level in their politics. However, it was with a big but. The majority were agreed that when it comes to corruption, the educated were the culprit in most societies. Citing their country as an example, they were of the view that the enlightened were the majority in the State Capture report compiled by Justice Raymond Zondo. Nevertheless others were of the view that professionalizing the public sector was one way of making things difficult for those who go into politics to loot. Those who were of the view that there be entry level in their politics backed their version by referring to a Norwegian study which has revealed that education makes politicians endure high level of efficiency in their situation. It was stated that in most cases, people go into politics because it is the road to prosperity.

Nevertheless, emphasis was laid on having political leaders with university degree. It was said that the most educated political leader in South Africa is Pieter Gronerwald of Freedom Front Plus with a doctorate degree while Mosioa Lekota of Congress of the People (COPE) has metric qualifications and Jacob Zuma very low qualifications yet he served the country as the president. Participants generally agreed that party leaders should be equipped with university degree qualifications.

When I watched the debate and read the topic for discussion, I wished the discussions would be taking place in Botswana where there is deficit of degree holders at various levels of political and traditional leadership and where looting of state institutions by the elite leads to projects being delayed indefinitely or abandoned. The nearest example is the Tshele Hills Fuel Depot near Rasesa. Construction work there has been stopped ever since it was announced that millions of funds set aside for the project have been misappropriated. I pass through that project every week on my way to the cattle post. I would not be surprised if people would start vandalizing what had been put up before funds found their way into personal bank accounts. The National Assembly is gradually becoming an improved house concerning the level of education. It is no longer like some years back when Dr. Kenneth Koma was the only member with doctorate degree and perhaps Ponatshego Kedikilwe, Archie Mogwe, David Magang, Ray Molomo, Gaositwe Chiepe and Margret Nasha being among a few only ones with university degree. During those olden days there were members who would spend the life of parliament without ever contributing to the debate except for voting. Some would try their best to speak the language of parliament which was English but they struggled. I remember when the artificial insemination scheme was introduced; a member who wanted to argue that the scheme should benefit the small farmer only, his slip of the tongue said ‘the rich must use their own semen’. The unfortunate thing among current crop of members of parliament is lack of discipline. There are some who are ill mannered so much that they don’t feel ashamed to utter insults in front of television cameras.

At councils, the level of education has been disappointing for many years including the period when this country had just attained independence. However, at that time it was understandable to even have councillors who had not been to school. By the beginning of the 90s, surely Botswana’s political parties should have begun to field at least people with Cambridge certificates as council candidates. It has been my wish all along for Botswna to set entry level for politicians and dikgosi.

Sometime in an election year, a team of campaigners arrived at my mother’s home in the Mochudi East Constituency. Their mission was to solicit support for their candidate. After introducing themselves and the purpose for the visit, I asked them why we should vote for their candidate. They said their candidate was better than the rest of the other candidates and that he would bring development closer to our home. I knew the candidate well. H was a form II failure at a community junior secondary school. I asked the candidate to tell me the number of zeros in the figure ten billion Pula. When he could not tell me, I reminded him and his campaign team that gone were the days when council budget were in the region of thousands pula and that councils’ budget had gone up to billions. That meant that it required people with better qualifications to run those budgets. He started wobbling saying he was going to bring us development if elected.

I said to the candidate that, when I grew up we did not have stand pipes in our yards and now we have them. We had only three primary schools and one secondary in Mochudi. The number of primary schools has gone up to 13 including the three which were constructed before independence. I further told him that the number of schools offering secondary education has gone up to seven. The team then left our home unceremoniously saying I was wasting their time. Honestly, I am not highly educated but I considered myself better candidate than the one who wanted me to vote for him so that he represented me at council. I wanted to be represented by a strong person who would understand the work of all council committees and their budgets. Looking at the kgotlas, one sees nothing except an area neglected by the dikgosi themselves and the government. The level of education of people charged with the responsibility to dispense of justice to the community is so poor that one wonders how their judgements fare if taken on appeal to the higher courts.

Using Kgatleng as an example, this is an area where the majority of court presidents have not passed the junior certificate. I read a judgement of one of them the other day. It was a matter between the Pheko family versus another. The matter had been adjudicated by the land board and somehow was registered at the kgotla as a new matter. It was heard by a court president with standard seven qualifications who ended up tempering with a decision taken by land board members majority of who have university degrees. The need for better educated court presidents at the kgotlas is overdue. Kgosi Linchwe II was one of the people who were concerned about the level of education of dikgosi. In a paper he presented at a symposium on the topic, ‘Chieftainship in the 21st Century’ organized in Gaborone by Botswana Society, he said if chiefs were to continue to contribute effectively to the development of Botswana, future chiefs would need to be better educated and more conversant with developments not only in Botswana, but throughout the world. He said if they did not improve their levels of education, ‘we might see an increase in the appointment of non-chiefs as tribal authorities’ undermining the status of hereditary chiefs.

The completion of a nature guiding qualification by Junior Atlang Lubinda under the Anthony Birtles Scholarship is being presented by the Bush Ways Foundation as evidence of a deeper, more deliberate investment in skills development rather than once-off community support.

Lubinda recently completed a Nature Guiding course at the African Guides Academy and has since begun a 12-month internship with Bush Ways Botswana, a pathway that places him directly inside one of the country’s most important economic sectors. Tourism remains a major employer in northern Botswana, particularly for young people in rural and conservation-adjacent communities.

Unlike many short-term bursary schemes, the Anthony Birtles Scholarship fully funds training and links recipients to structured workplace experience. Lubinda was selected through a competitive process that, according to the Foundation, prioritised clarity of purpose and a demonstrated commitment to conservation and community upliftment.

Marketing coordinator Lesego Keeng said the programme reflects a shift in thinking around community development in tourism.

‘This is not just about assisting one student,’ Keeng said. ‘It is about creating practical routes for young Batswana to enter professions that matter to the sustainability of tourism and conservation.’

Lubinda completed his training in December 2025, with the Foundation citing strong academic results and leadership potential. His internship is expected to allow him to accumulate field hours required for full professional guiding certification and the acquisition of a Professional Guide Licence, a critical step for long-term employability in the sector.

Foundation manager Thato Israel said Lubinda’s progress illustrates what targeted investment in youth skills can achieve when training is linked to industry needs rather than abstract empowerment goals.

For Lubinda, the scholarship represents more than a qualification. He described it as a turning point that allowed him to see a future in a field often viewed as inaccessible to young people without financial backing or industry connections.

Introduced in 2025, the Anthony Birtles Scholarship is an annual initiative and forms part of the Bush Ways Foundation’s broader community upliftment strategy. The programme focuses on developing a pipeline of local professionals who can participate meaningfully in Botswana’s conservation and tourism economy, an approach increasingly seen as essential as the sector faces pressure to localise skills and leadership.

In 2024, Batswana made the biggest transformation in our country’s 60 year history: removing the BDP and choosing hope and change promised by the UDC. This political change coincided with another structural change which Batswana had been warned about for 30 years but never quite adequately prepared for: a collapse in diamond markets which threw Botswana’s economic status into the abyss. Whilst Batswana were ready to change politically they so far haven’t shown a propensity to change how we run our country economically but it finally feels like we don’t have a choice. It is time for Botswana to change its business model and this 2026 budget provides the perfect opportunity to steer this Titanic away from the economic iceberg threatening our well-being.

Understanding the Problem

Any financial advisor will tell you that budgeting is a simple function of Asset and Liabilities Matching (ALM). This is a fancy phrase used in financial analysis and management which simply means you need to ensure that the money you make is sufficient to take care of the commitments that you have; not just making sure you have enough but also making sure your revenues come at the same time as when your commitments are due. This therefore requires understanding the certainty of when your money is coming and how much of it is coming in order to make decisions on what to commit to. (I had been struggling to capture my thoughts properly for the past few years to explain our issues to the average Motswana until I saw a Linkedin post by Kgomotso Beleme and she captured it perfectly. Credit to her). If you take a household (and the principles are the same), the family has to determine its revenues in order to plan its commitments. Lets take an example of a permanent and pensionable government employee, say a nurse or a teacher who is married to an entrepreneur. The nurse or teacher knows exactly how much they earn and when that salary will come in. The entrepreneur on the other hand does not. Their income amounts and timings are more volatile and less certain. This therefore would mean the family should ordinarily plan using the certain salary for things like rent/mortgage, car payments, school fees, food etc. The entrepreneurs’ income would be taken to savings for a period and then utilized for ‘projects’ as the savings get bigger and bigger. If the family commits too much of the entrepreneur’s expected future earnings to things such as the mortgage payments and school fees and anything goes wrong, the family can find itself having to move out of its repossessed home or be forced to move children to government schools.

Now let’s relate this basic principle to what has happened in Botswana in the past. Most countries fund their budget from taxes, investment returns and borrowing. In the case of Botswana, historically the money we make from our investment in diamonds provided between 30-40% with the balance of our budget coming from tax collections from BURS and our quarterly payments from SACU. In taking the household example, the taxes from BURS and payments from SACU ordinarily should have been treated as the government worker salary with our revenues from our diamond investments being treated as volatile and uncertain. Fortunately for Botswana, unlike most commodity markets, diamonds have been peculiar and not been as volatile and we therefore started to (complacently) view the returns from there like a nurse’s salary. We knew that 10 times a year, De Beers would host diamond sights and on average $200 million dollars would hit the coffers. We budgeted with it, we built our savings and we built our whole way of life. We talked about diversifying, we were warned for decades but we never believed it. In 2008, the financial crisis warned us. We didn’t listen. We ate on savings and pretended everything was normal. Covid sent another warning. Again we didn’t listen. We continued to think it is business as usual (despite Dr Matsheka famously declaring we can’t be business as usual in his 2021 Budget Speech). Nothing changed. We assumed the certainty of diamond revenues we enjoyed for 40 years would continue. It didn’t. And our fiscal and economic state crashed.

So what has to happen?

We all have to agree we cannot carry on with the business-as-usual mentality. Going back to Asset and Liability Matching; we basically have to do a much better job in planning for our revenues. We can’t afford to keep treating diamond revenues as certain. We have to plan for worst case scenario where diamond revenues are between BWP8-10 billion rather than between BWP20-30 billion. Since 2020, most years we pretended diamond revenues would be certain (and were right maybe at best twice out of 6 years) and chose to try to ‘stimulate’ the economy by increased development spending under programs such as the Economic Recovery and Transformation Plan (ERTP) and the Development Manager (DM) models and funded the short fall in budgets by eating away 30 years worth of foreign reserves savings in a couple of years. After depleting the reserves, our next step has been trying to plug these funding deficits with debt and loans. We are therefore committing future generations of Batswana to debts simply because we refuse to adjust our lifestyles.

I am hoping that in the budget of 2026/2027 with the theme ‘New Era of Economic Transformation and Fiscal Prudence’ we will finally see Botswana take the asset and liability approach and correctly plan. In practical terms this implies scaling back the budget expenditures from being in the BWP80 to 90 billions back to mid BWP60 billions to acknowledge your lack of certainty on diamond revenues. As a result you have to defer a lot of development spending i.e. we may have to hold off on new roads, pipelines, schools, hospitals where a clear business case does not exist or where we aren’t able to structure them in a feasible public private partnership. With a current salary bill of BWP35 billion being the largest component of our commitments, we have to freeze salaries for the foreseeable future and may have to have conversations on how to reduce this number significantly. Whilst this is unpopular, we have to acknowledge we are not in 1990-2020 Botswana. We have reached an inflection point and pretending otherwise will simply crash the economy and saddle our future generations with needless debt.

One of the big exercises in ALM is figuring which liabilities are essential and which ones are nice to haves. For example, I believe we can all agree that our health care and education are some of the most precious things to Botswana. They form part of our values and pride but we also have to acknowledge they have deteriorated exponentially in the last 15-20 years. However, we then need to examine other welfare practices we have entrenched and aspire for. Can we continue to spend billions on tertiary education taking our students to some of the universities we are taking them to (especially the questionable ones)? Can we continue and expand bo Ipelegeng? Should we be having means testing for utilization of government schools and hospitals and have anyone on medical aid paying a more cost reflective fee? Or paying a cost reflective fee for education? Can we really increase allowances and build more roads and schools? Can we afford fancy learner management systems or should we be going back to basics and investing on maintaining schools and clinics and ensuring standards are back to pre 2005 times?

I hope to see the upcoming budget reflect real and committed prudence. Budgeting with money we can properly plan for. Cutting back on fancy spending and going back to basics of good health care and education. Reducing the wasteful spending and of course cutting down on procurement wastage and leakages. Planning for the worst and praying diamond revenues come back and then ploughing whatever revenues we get from diamonds back into savings and paying down debts. Exercising restraint for a few years in order to land this plane safely. The Honorable Minister Gaolathe needs to change course of this country and make us all see this country has fundamentally changed. It is unfortunate that all the mistakes of the last 20 years are needing to be corrected by him and most would require going against the UDC manifesto but the reality is there is no opportunity for political expediency. The current governments legacy might not be economic transformation but rather economic stabilization after 20 years of reckless drivers at the wheel. Pretending otherwise is futile for their legacy and the future of this country.

A simmering legal dispute between veteran labour activist Johnson Motshwarakgole and senior public official Andrew D’bois Motsamai escalated this week after Motshwarakgole rejected demands to retract remarks described by Motsamai’s lawyers as ‘injurious, malicious and defamatory.’

In a response, Motshwarakgole’s attorneys, Charles Colombia Consultancy, dismissed the demand issued by Otto Itumeleng Law Chambers as ‘misconceived, legally untenable, and without merit,’ effectively calling what they characterised as an attempt to intimidate their client into silence.

The dispute arises from an urgent court application in which Motshwarakgole cited Motsamai as the ninth respondent while opposing his appointment to a senior position as secretary of the Public Service Bargaining Council. In the founding affidavit, Motshwarakgole alleged that there were ‘unresolved and serious allegations of financial impropriety arising from [Motsamai’s] tenure at Botswana Public Employees Union.’ Motsamai’s legal team argues that these remarks tarnish his integrity and credibility.

Motsamai’s lawyers further objected to statements made by Motshwarakgole during a press conference held on 2 February 2026, where he publicly questioned Motsamai’s integrity. They demanded that the statements be expunged and retracted by 16:00 on the same day the demand letter was served.

However, Motshwarakgole’s attorneys rejected both the substance and the urgency of the demand.

‘We note, at the outset, that the timeline imposed was wholly unreasonable,’ the response letter states adding that Motsamai had already been aware of the affidavit’s contents since 1 February.

‘At the outset, our Client denies that any of the statements complained of are defamatory, unlawful, malicious, or actuated by any intention to injure your Client’s reputation,’ the letter continues.

The response argues that the statements were made within the context of active judicial proceedings and are therefore protected by legal privilege. ‘Our Client is advised that statements made in the course of court proceedings are privileged, provided that they are relevant to the issues before the Court, which is plainly the case herein,’ the attorneys wrote.

They further dismissed the demand to expunge or retract the affidavit, stating it was ‘legally untenable.’

On the press conference remarks, Motshwarakgole’s lawyers said their client merely raised concerns already in the public domain and acted ‘in good faith, in the public interest, and without making any false factual assertions.’

The letter also emphasised Motsamai’s status as a public figure. ‘Your Client is a public figure occupying a senior public office,’ the attorneys wrote adding that ‘fair comment on matters of public interest, including issues of governance, integrity, and accountability, is lawful and constitutionally protected.’

Motsamai’s legal team, however, maintains that the claims are misleading. They argue that he voluntarily relinquished the presidency of BOPEU in 2017 and that police investigations concluded in August 2022 without him being a subject of investigation. They insist he is ‘a fit and proper person who has been successfully vetted for the current management position in the Public Service.’

Despite this, Motshwarakgole has refused to retreat.

‘In the circumstances, our Client is not amenable to the demands set out. and accordingly declines to retract the statements complained of,’ the response states while reserving the right to defend the matter in court.

Preparation is the epitaphs of good communications.

Nobody is ever a good communicator by chance. They have to work at it – putting into it immense and meticulous work and planning.

Behind every good communicator are many hours of preparation, preparation and preparation.

Cabinet ministers should not be struggling to sell the idea of a Constitutional Court to the nation.

There are many genuine reasons why the country needs a Constitutional court..

Invoking these reasons with confidence and clarity will make our ministers appear much more believable.

For a majority of Batswana, a Constitutional Court is a low hanging fruit that promises to deliver them from the numerous grave deprivations bequeathed this nation by several layers of tribal inequalities.

Take for example the Bobonong / Bobirwa constituency as a case study.

Bobonong / Bobirwa has Taolo Lucas as its Member of Parliament.

Taolo Lucas is not your average politician. He is deputy leader of Botswana Congress Party. BCP is the official opposition.

And he has an expansive presence inside the BCP.

As things stand, the BCP has already made its position known – not just on the Constitutional Court but on the imminent Referendum too.

Lucas is one of BCP’s foremost debaters. He is fearless.

He is a hard hitter.

Like their Member of Parliament, the people of Bobonong / Bobirwa constituency strongly feel that they should have their own paramount Kgosi.

This demand is very fundamental to their identity as a people. This demand cuts across political party allegiances in that area. And this demand generally unites the people.

Naturally these people see themselves as victims.

They say they do not want to have Ian Khama as their Kgosi.

They want to have their own Kgosi who shall be Ian Khama’s equal, sitting side by side with him in the House of Chiefs.

Who is best placed to resolve this complex matter? The answer is simple; the Constitutional Court.

And we are not done yet.

The people in Bobonong /Bobirwa say they want to have a tribal territory of their own.

At the moment their tribal territory is part of Gammangwato, with a headquarters in Serowe.

They add that they want to have their own Land Board that is not subservient to the one in Serowe.

They say they do not have any relationship with Bangwato other than a feudalist master/servant arrangement which cannot be allowed to go on unchallenged in this era.

Cabinet ministers going around the country to justify the Concourt could use the situation in Bobonong / Bobirwa as a template – and deploy it in their meetings around the country. Whether you go to Maun, Okavango, Letlhakane, Tonota, Tutume and many other place, similar situations exist

Cabinet ministers need to find a simple but coherent message on why it is necessary to establish a Constitutional Court ahead of the Constitutional Review process.

A person listening to a minister in Gantsi should receive the same message like another person listening to another minister in Tonota.

At the moment it seems to me like there is no aligned strategy among ministers.

Every minister seems to rely on their own strengths of public speaking and delivery.

It is exactly because they are not talking from a uniform script, that they are now talking in turns.

At another extreme, those against the Constitutional Court have seized on the state of public health to say government should fix public health before talking of introducing a Constitutional Court.

Too often we see ministers falling into the trap, including by saying the Constitutional Court will fix public health.

The onus is now on technical advisors to come up with a plan to rescue the narrative.

One way to do so would be for our ministers to acknowledge upfront that indeed there are problems besieging our public health for example.

And then emphasise that action is being taken. This is a much better strategy than saying the Constitutional Court will address health issues ass some ministers keep saying.

A Constitutional Court does not address bureaucratic bottlenecks like delivering textbooks to schools or delivering medicines to hospitals.

Administrative incompetence is not going to disappear when the Constitutional Court is introduced.

Rather, the Court serves to affirm, interpret and protect the rights.

The next logical step for our ministers would then be to emphasise that it is incorrect to suggest that the intention to establish a Court means that other critical matters such as the health situation, Foot and Mouth Disease, Gender Based Violence, Crime, Corruption, poor infrastructure are not being given the attention they deserve.

Government is a huge animal with diverse capabilities. So, these matters and more are being given urgent attention through various arms of Government.

In strategic communications, this is called ‘deflection.’

Deflection will help ministers regain control of the Constitutional Court conversation by also emphasising that other important enabling tasks also need to be done simultaneously and in parallel. One such is the current engagements on the establishment of the Court pending a wholesale review of the constitution.

The next step would be to focus on why it is so important to have Constitutional Court.

A Constitutional Court deals with interpreting rights, upholding rights and protecting applicants against violations of their constitutional rights. As Batswana plan a wholesome review of the Constitution, a Constitutional Court will help in this way.

There is no question that a Constitutional Court will expeditiously resolve issues pertaining to constitutional rights much faster than a High Court currently does.

Issues so resolved would then simply be noted and rightly put in the final Constitution without having to go all over them during the Review process.

For example, if there had been a Constitutional Court during the Dow citizenship case, it would most likely have taken a shorter time to resolve as opposed to the two or so years it took, thus saving time and money.

From the top of my mind, there are a number of issues that require the immediate intervention of the Constitutional Court. Civil imprisonment on account of debt owing is one such. This affects too many of our people.

In fact, this is so widespread that I still remember instances where a few of today’s ministers were imprisoned when we were still together in the trenches and I had to rescue a few of them. Today they are above it and out of reach of such. But they should not forget those of us who are still within reach of the same fate.

Another thing, ministers have no reason to rush to the issue of death penalty in their meetings.

Too often in their meetings, it the ministers who raise this issue even begore the public.

In my view that is a mistake.

Botswana Housing Corporation has raised P285 million through a private placement under its medium-term note programme, adding fresh funding as the state-owned developer manages maturing debt and an expanding construction pipeline.

The transaction, completed in December 2025, consisted of two unsecured tranches. A P100 million note matures in 2032 and carries a fixed coupon of 15 percent, while a P185 million tranche due in 2030 offers a 14.5 percent coupon. Following the placement, total outstanding notes increased to P685 million from P400 million previously.

The fundraising coincided with pressure on the balance sheet. A listed bond matured in December 2025 and 76 percent of BHC’s P529.3 million borrowings were classified as current liabilities, tightening liquidity. Although trade receivables improved on stronger collections, cash and cash equivalents declined 44 percent to P405.5 million in the six months to September 2025, compared with the March 2024 year-end.

Proceeds from the placement are supporting refinancing requirements alongside ongoing project delivery. BHC is advancing developments in Phakalane, Gerald Estates in Francistown, Kazungula, Lobatse and Jwaneng, including contract housing for police and prison officers under the Employee Housing Initiative. A central pillar of the strategy is the Bonno National Housing Programme, which targets affordable units for low- and middle-income earners, with homes under construction in Gaborone Block 7 forming part of the national rollout.

Construction momentum has lifted inventories to more than P828 million as units approach completion. Financial performance has improved, with BHC returning to profitability in the first half of the 2025/26 financial year. Profit after tax rose to P32.3 million for the six months to 30 September 2025 from P10.8 million earlier.

Botswana’s proposed P378 billion development spending plan under the draft National Development Plan 12 (NDP12) is ‘a fantasy’ that cannot be implemented or financed. This is according to the latest Fourth Quarter Economic Review by economic consultancy Econsult.

In a hard-hitting assessment of the country’s fiscal outlook, Econsult says the development budget has become one of the most serious weaknesses in Botswana’s public finances citing years of inefficiency, poor project design and weak implementation. ‘The development budget is a particular problem, in part because past development spending has been incredibly inefficient and wasteful,’ Econsult says.

According to the firm, ‘Projects have been badly designed and implemented, but also there have been too many low-return, low-impact projects adopted that cannot possibly generate economic gains.’ The firm argues that instead of stimulating growth, many development projects have ‘acted as a drag on growth rather than boosting growth,’ largely because there has been no effective screening or appraisal system to prioritise high-impact projects within realistic budget limits.

This problem, Econsult says, is starkly illustrated by the draft NDP12 Public Investment Plan (PIP), which proposes spending P378 billion over five years from 2025/26 to 2029/30.

‘The proposed PIP of P378 billion over the five years is a fantasy,’ the review states.

For the 2026/27 financial year alone, NDP12 proposes a development budget of P54.24 billion, a figure Econsult describes as ‘completely unrealistic’.

‘This level of proposed spending could not possibly be implemented or financed,’ the firm says, adding that it hopes the figure ‘does not appear in the final 2026/27 budget when it is presented on February 9th.’

Econsult estimates that, under current conditions, a sustainable development budget for 2026/27 should not exceed P17 billion unless government undertakes drastic cuts to recurrent expenditure, including workforce reductions.

The review also pushes back against political calls for a higher share of the national budget to be allocated to development spending.

‘Claims by many politicians and commentators that the overall budget should devote a higher proportion of spending to development projects is ill-informed and does not stand up to logical scrutiny,’ Econsult says.

The firm notes that every development project creates permanent recurrent costs such as maintenance, staffing and operational expenses, meaning that over time, recurrent spending inevitably rises while the relative share of development spending must fall.

‘The challenge is to refocus the development budget on high-return projects by proper project appraisal and prioritisation,’ Econsult argues. ‘But this essentially means that for budget sustainability and boosting economic growth, the development spending budget must become both smaller and much more effective.’

On public debt, Econsult warns that Botswana’s problem is not the current level of debt but its rapid upward trajectory.

‘Botswana’s public debt is currently estimated at 32% of GDP,’ the firm notes, below the statutory limit of 40%. ‘However, it is not the level of debt that is the issue for Botswana but its trajectory; a sustainable debt can easily become an unsustainable debt if new borrowing is excessive.’

Public debt has risen sharply from 22.7% of GDP in March 2024, largely because government savings have been exhausted after years of financing deficits through drawdowns rather than borrowing.

Econsult cautions that even a single large deficit – around 9% of GDP – could push Botswana beyond its legal debt ceiling.

Raising the debt limit would not solve the underlying problem, the firm warns. ‘If the budget has an unsustainable deficit that is not being addressed, raising the debt limit just means that this behaviour can continue for longer.’

The review also flags growing government payment arrears as ‘hidden debt’ citing a mid-January statement by the Minister of Transport that government owes P15 billion to roads contractors.

‘If correct, this would indicate an even higher level of arrears across government as a whole,’ Econsult says. It called for arrears to be properly quantified and published alongside official public debt figures.