Dejavu: Judiciary dispute reawakens old tensions
Spira Tlhankane | Monday October 13, 2025 10:01
This isn’t the first time the CJ has been embroiled in a high-stakes internal battle. Just a few years ago, Ketlogetswe was locked in a very public and legal confrontation with his predecessor, former Chief Justice Terrence Rannowane. At the time, Ketlogetswe, then a high court judge, accused Rannowane of dishonesty and interfering with judicial independence. The allegations escalated when Ketlogetswe also implicated then-Minister of State President, Kabo Morwaeng, in influencing the handling of a case involving former Lobatse legislator Dr Thapelo Matsheka.
The 2022-2023 standoff was unprecedented in modern judicial history and raised alarm bells about internal fractures within the supposedly impartial legal fraternity. Observers at the time warned that it signalled deeper systemic issues about how power is exercised, challenged, and preserved within the judiciary.
The matter escalated into a legal standoff that left the judiciary bruised and exposed. At some point during the height of the legal battle, Rannowane lost a case in which the State had filed an interlocutory application to strike out averments, which it deemed ‘scandalous’ and had the potential to damage the image of the Judiciary and Rannowane. “CJ’s reputation will be damaged if those allegations are left to be part of the record,” the State indicated at the time.
At the time, Ketlogetswe was facing disciplinary action and had made an application to interdict Rannowane, President Mokgweetsi Masisi, and the Judicial Service Commission (JSC) from instituting disciplinary action against him. Ketlogetswe, at some point, wanted the then Acting CJ Godfrey Radijeng to recuse himself because the office in which he was acting (Chief Justice’s Office) was implicated in the matter. Radijeng refused to recuse himself and dismissed the matter.
Now, the Kebonang affair is unfolding under eerily similar circumstances. Once again, the judiciary appears divided, and the public is left watching a drama that seems to repeat itself every few years, only with new actors in leading roles.
At the centre of the current dispute is Kebonang’s refusal to recuse himself from cases involving the Attorney General (AG), which Ketlogetswe reportedly says it compromises judicial impartiality. A formal complaint has since been lodged with the JSC, reigniting concerns about transparency, judicial independence, and the long-standing tension at the top levels of the legal system.
The politics behind the benchThe latest developments are also tinged with political undercurrents. Notably, during his earlier battle with Rannowane, Ketlogetswe secured legal representation from Duma Boko, a prominent advocate and then opposition leader. Boko, now President of the country following last year’s landmark elections, quickly appointed Ketlogetswe as CJ upon taking office and retired Rannowane.
Fast forward to today, Justice Kebonang, once perceived as a more neutral judicial voice, now finds himself under the microscope in what some legal commentators describe as a “purge disguised as an audit.” Sources indicate that Ketlogetswe also launched a similar audit against another judge, Itumeleng Segopolo, suggesting a broader push to consolidate influence within the judiciary.
The repeating cycle of
recusal controversies
The core issue at stake in the Kebonang matter judicial recusals is also not new. Ironically, CJ Ketlogetswe himself faced intense criticism for refusing to recuse himself from a politically sensitive case involving the Umbrella for Democratic Change (UDC), the very party now in power.
This recurring theme of selective recusal and perceived conflicts of interest has become emblematic of the judiciary’s current crisis, a body that demands impartiality yet is repeatedly drawn into factional battles. Each episode, whether it was Ketlogetswe VS Rannowane or now Ketlogetswe VS Kebonang, has deepened the perception that Botswana’s courts are not immune to external winds. Insiders say that while audits and complaints may be legally valid tools for ensuring ethical conduct, their selective use, particularly when involving high-profile judges, often reads more like an internal purge than genuine reform.
There are mixed reviews as others feel that Ketlogetswe is ushering in a more accountable judiciary, while some opine that the country is witnessing another chapter in a long saga of judicial turf wars. People feel that the judiciary is trapped in a cycle and that Botswana’s bench keeps reliving the same crisis. The names may change, but the storyline remains stubbornly the same, critics note.
“This isn’t just a matter of judicial discipline. It’s part of a pattern, senior judges being accused of impropriety or bias, investigations being launched under questionable timing, and a broader atmosphere of distrust and intrigue clouding the judiciary. These events have become cyclical, a revolving door of suspicion and internal rivalry,” an insider told Mmegi. Back then, Ketlogetswe positioned himself as a defender of transparency and independence. Now, having assumed the office of CJ with the backing of President Boko, his former legal representative, Ketlogetswe, finds himself turning the same instruments against others with a worry that roles have reversed, but the script has not changed.
Justice Kebonang today is in a position similar to the one Ketlogetswe occupied before, as he is resisting pressure from above. For commentators, the sense of déjà vu that now hangs over the judiciary is not just a coincidence but a reflection of unresolved tensions and unaddressed vulnerabilities.
Some members are concerned that when judges begin to turn against each other in public, the damage extends far beyond their own careers. They feel that it weakens public confidence in the rule of law and feeds the growing narrative that Botswana’s judiciary is not immune to the kind of internal politicking seen in other branches of government. Overall, Botswana’s judiciary seemed to be trapped in a loop.