Speaker declines to intervene in BPF disputes
Tsaone Basimanebotlhe | Monday March 30, 2026 06:00
Consequently, Keorapetse said, it has become increasingly difficult for Parliament to determine a single, authoritative stance from the party.
“Our office does not mingle or interfere with the internal affairs of political parties,” he said in response to enquiries. “At present, only the courts can provide clear direction on the matter. The BPF must either resolve its internal issues or re-approach the courts for a definitive ruling.”
Keorapetse emphasised that the contradictory nature of the correspondences received highlight the depth of divisions within the party.
While some factions claim that certain members have been expelled, others strongly dispute such decisions, creating uncertainty even at the level of parliamentary representation.
Adding to the confusion, Members of Parliament (MPs) affiliated with the BPF have also written to the Speaker’s office, presenting positions that differ from those of other party leaders.
This, according to Keorapetse, further complicates any attempt by Parliament to take action without clear legal guidance. He reiterated that the laws governing Parliament were explicit and must be respected by all political players.
“Parliament operates within a well-defined legal framework. Political parties are expected to understand these laws and the limits of parliamentary authority,” he said, adding that his office cannot act on the basis of contested claims.
Mmegi has established that current legislation does not permit MPs to freely defect from their political parties.
Instead, legislators are required to retain their party affiliation unless specific legal circumstances arise. However, a distinction exists in cases of expulsion. Where a political party formally expels an MP, that legislator does not lose their parliamentary seat but rather assumes the status of an independent candidate.
This legal position has been precedent in country’s political history. A notable example is that of Unity Dow, when resigned from Botswana Democratic Party (BDP) in 2023. She became an independent candidate and continued to serve as an MP.
However, the situation of an elected legislator is different from an independent MP candidate since when he/she resigns from the party, there would be a vacancy for the MP seat.
Associate Professor of Law in the Department of Law at University of Botswana, Tachilisa Balule, shared similar sentiments with the speaker of the National Assembly.
“A vacancy can only be there if an MP resigns not whereby a party expels him or her,” he said. “Currently, the issue of the BPF needs court to resolve it if they cannot solve it themselves as there is none who can claim party leadership as it stands and therefore, Parliament can only act when there is a court order directing it not to regard those MPs as BPF ones.”
BPF has not had peace since its formation as some members especially at national executive committee (NEC) level have been the ones fighting which end up affecting party members.
The evolving situation within the organisation has therefore, placed a spotlight on the intersection of party politics and parliamentary procedure, particularly regarding the limits of institutional authority and the role of the judiciary in resolving political disputes.
Until a clear and unified position emerges either from within the party or through the courts Parliament is unlikely to take any decisive action.
Ultimately, the impasse reflects broader challenges within party politics, where internal divisions can spill over into national institutions, testing both legal frameworks and governance norms.