The Landmark LM V AG Case And The Socially Argued "Morality"

“There is nothing reasonable and justifiable by discriminating against fellow members of our diversified society.” This statement is quoted from the recently decided LM v AG case.

That’s enough to make us halt our regular programming, and address this, at least for a week, before going back to our multidisciplinary approach to adolescence, wouldn’t you say? 

With a full bench, the Botswana High Court held at Gaborone, on June 11, 2019 handed down a groundbreaking, landmark, and I dare say revolutionary judgement that is sure to change lives. It is one of those times that one must commend the judiciary for upholding justice. Phased with the apparent task of balancing morals and the law, the Court rose to the occasion, proclaiming the independence of the judiciary, and the role it plays in ensuring not only that the law is administered, but also that the dispute on the morality argument, against the human rights position, is ensured.  Very early on in the judgement, the Court acknowledged the need to note that “what is morally good or bad to one person in the realm of sexual orientation, choice and preference, may not necessarily be so to another person, hence a happy and shining reflection of our plurality, diversity, inclusivity and tolerance to both majority and minority rights.” 

Editor's Comment
Inspect the voters' roll!

The recent disclosure by the IEC that 2,513 registrations have been turned down due to various irregularities should prompt all Batswana to meticulously review the voters' rolls and address concerns about rejected registrations.The disparities flagged by the IEC are troubling and emphasise the significance of rigorous voter registration processes.Out of the rejected registrations, 29 individuals were disqualified due to non-existent Omang...

Have a Story? Send Us a tip
arrow up