Manual Workers Union persists in fighting Motsamai's appointment
Goitsemodimo Kaelo | Wednesday March 4, 2026 06:00
The move follows a recent decision by the Lobatse High Court dismissing the union’s urgent application for an interdict to halt Motsamai’s appointment. Undeterred, the union is now pursuing broader relief, arguing that the process leading to the appointment was unlawful and inconsistent with the Constitution of the PSBC.
The union has issued an intention to institute action against Attorney General, Botswana Teachers Union, Botswana Public Employees Union, Botswana Sectors of Educators Trade Union, Botswana Land Board and Local Authorities and Health Workers Union, Botswana Nurses Union, and Botswana Doctors Union, Motsamai, and Tobokani Rari to court, arguing that their decision to appoint both Motsamai and Rari as secretary and deputy secretary was unlawful.
Central to the dispute is a meeting allegedly held on January 30, 2026, during which Motsamai and Tobokani Rari were appointed as the secretary and deputy secretary, respectively. The union contends that the meeting was invalid and that all resolutions adopted at that gathering are “null and void.”
In its notice of intention to sue papers, the union seeks an order declaring that the PSBC constitution signed by the applicant and the DPSM on behalf of the employer and the other six unions is binding and remains in full force and effect. It further asks the court to confirm that the signatories to the constitution are the founding members of the council and are entitled to exercise the powers conferred by that constitution.
Manual Workers argues that any decisions taken outside the proper constitutional framework, including the appointment of the secretary and deputy secretary, are unlawful.
Amongst the reliefs the unions intend to seek is a directive compelling the attorney general to convene, within 30 days of judgment, a meeting of the signatories to the PSBC constitution. The proposed agenda would focus on matters outlined in Clauses 5.1 to 5.9 of the constitution, which include governance structures and key operational procedures.
The union also proposes that, should the AG fail to issue the notice, any of the signatories may do so. Furthermore, if some parties elect not to attend, those present would be entitled to proceed and pass binding resolutions.
In an alternative cause of action, the union is mounting a far-reaching challenge, arguing that the PSBC constitution itself is fatally defective. The union contends that the constitution fails to expressly confirm that its signatories are the founding members of the council. Without such recognition, it argues, the document is incapable of implementation and therefore “incurably bad.”
The union further submits that the establishment of the Bargaining Council should precede the appointment of a Secretary, maintaining that “without the Bargaining Council, the so-called secretary cannot breathe life into the constitution.”
'Chronologically, the establishment of the Bargaining Council should precede the appointment of its Secretary; without the Bargaining Council, the so-called Secretary cannot breathe life into the constitution. The failure to include a clause in the constitution specifically confirming that the signatories to the constitution are the founding members of the Bargaining Council renders the constitution fatally flawed,' the union states in the papers.
On this alternative basis, the union seeks an order declaring the Constitution null and void. It also asks the court to compel the AG to convene, within 30 days, a fresh meeting to negotiate a new constitution in line with Section 52 of the Public Service Act. As with its primary claim, the union proposes that other parties may convene the meeting if the Attorney General fails to do so, and that those in attendance may proceed in the absence of others.
Meanwhile, there is concern amongst union leaders that the case is likely to have significant implications for labour relations within the public service.
“The PSBC plays a central role in negotiations between government and trade unions, and uncertainty over its governance structures could affect collective bargaining processes,” said a unionist close to the developments.