For a start, how many awards? Ten is too restrictive. Why not work around 40, one for each year? Then devise some initial criteria which can be later adjusted according to need.
Should awards be limited to citizens or embrace all those who have made notable contributions? How many categories of award should there be? Consideration could be given to having Government and Constitutional Affairs, Human Rights, Health, Academia, Engineering, the Arts with crafts which would include film and photography, the Media, the Law, Education, Agriculture and Horticulture and Commerce with other awards perhaps for areas such as Gallantry and Civic Duty. The problem created by such an approach is that there may prove to be too many outstanding individuals in one category and none in another.
Some might then argue that to maintain the original spread, an indifferent candidate should be accepted in an under-represented category even if it is at the expense of a much higher rated individual in one that is over-represented.
Thus, is the criterion to be one of quality or distribution? Indeed, would it be a requirement that someone should be widely known in order to get an award? That’s a problem too, isn’t it? Take Gavin Lamont, for instance, because he would not fit into any of those categories and because he is an unfamiliar name to most people. But then he was the person who discovered the whereabouts of all those lovely diamonds. And without them, where would we all be?
And what about the individual who has made major contributions in several categories without being placed at the top in any of them? Would that person, as a result, be discarded or included because they met a wider set of criteria? But then again, would candidates be expected to have made a contribution during the entire 40 year period or would it be acceptable that their star had shone only for five of them? How would that weighting be worked out? Would forty years of worthy service count for more than five years of absolute brilliance?
How would a panel of 40 year old judges be able to assess people’s achievements and contributions in the 1960s and 1970s when they themselves were still at primary school? How can objective and fair judgments be made both about the recent and long distant past?Would the old be placed at a disadvantage because they are old or would the young feel that they have been discriminated against because of their youth?If the idea of 40th anniversary awards is to be implemented it is obvious that the general public must somehow be involved and must be given the opportunity to nominate chosen individuals.
Should this happen, a major difficulty that an awards panel would need to confront is determining how to rate an individual who is well known in one area of the country but unknown everywhere else? During the last 40 years, for instance, there have been many outsiders who have made remarkable contributions to the well being of the Basarwa/San but who are unknown in Tutume or Sikwane.
Would the collective Marshall family, for instance, be considered for an award for what they did, or be rejected because of what they didn’t?
