A nameless village in Tswapong

| Wednesday April 25, 2007 00:00

This verdict was a source of happiness and regarded as a hard won victory by a group of people in the village, who have had a long running battle with the Bammangwato Tribal Authority, Central District Council and the Central Government. Other residents were caught by surprise, they were devastated and felt completely hard done, mainly because they were never made part of this long running feud, which was fought in the High Court.

They sensed that there is a grand plan orchestrated by residents who originate from one of the four co-founding villages which were merged, to form the 'Current Village', to use their numerical power and impose their will on other residents, and eventually to take over control of the whole Village, hence their quick action to oppose the election method, through the same High Court.

For someone who does not have a well-grounded understanding of the root cause of the Matolwane/Lesenepole conflict, the election method as proposed by the High Court may sound quite democratic and fair. After all Botswana is a democratic country and elections are common practice in various institutions. Below I would like to demonstrate why this line of thinking is flawed.

For the sake of simplicity, let us take the case of two friends Mark and Lewis who are farmers. The two agree to form and run a syndicate by the name Kgomokgwena. When informing their families about the name of the syndicate, some members of Mark' s family raise an objection. The dissenting members want the syndicate named after their grandfather - Sesame, as some kind of remembrance. Lewis' family has no problem with the name Kgomokgwena and they all welcome it. Officially the syndicate goes by the name Kgomokgwena as indicated in the land use certificate, but informally some members of Mark' s family continue to call it by their grandfather' s name and refer to it as Sesame. The situation goes on like this until both Mark and Lewis die.

A few years after their death, Mark's family; challenge the Local and National Authorities for referring to the syndicate as Kgomokgwena, and not using their grandfather's name instead. The family takes the matter to court claiming the name was not democratically arrived at. In addition Mark's family now claims to be more indigenous to the area in which the borehole is located, and that the area use to be owned by their grandfather hence their insistence that the syndicate be named after him. It also happens that at that time, Mark' s family had 15 members and Lewis' family had only six members. Given this scenario, can we safely conclude that justice would have been done, if the court had to rule; that members of the two families should resolve the issue, by voting for the name of the syndicate in an election, where each vote by any family member carry the same weight?

To expect any member of Mark's family to Vote against the use of his/her grandfather' s name would be asking for the impossible. The elections would be a mere formality to hand over the syndicate to Marks family as well as giving legitimacy to their other numerous claims. Who knows what will be the next move by the Mark's, after winning the first battle?

The Lesenepole/Matolwane case is no different from what I have described above. In brief, the current village is a product of an agreement made amongst the four villages of Lesenepole, Raphiri, Matoposane and Moremi, in the late sixties. The headmen of the four villages responding to the movement's call for small villages to merge or group themselves to form larger settlements; in order to be provided with common amenities, made an undertaking to relocate from their old sites and to go and settle near a hill called Matolwane. Part of the agreement was that the new village would assume a neutral name. Hence it was found appropriate to give the village a name, which is similar to that of the hill next to it. In other words, before the four villages were merged, there was no village by the name Matolwane. Matolwane is therefore a collective name for the four villages.

From the paragraph above it should be quite clear that the notion that there is a fight or disagreement between people of Matolwane and people of Lesenepole about the name of the village is incorrect. The fact of the matter is Lesenepole is a sector of Matolwane, if the agreement of the four villages; is to be followed to the letter. Those who originate from Lesenepole now appear to be reneging on this noble project, but they do not have the guts to openly declare their true intentions. The truth is 'Ba batla bogosi ja motse wa Matolwane mine ga ba ba tle go bidiwa batho ba Matolwane.' The idea of Lesenepolising the whole village is a means to ascending to Matolwane Kgotla. Their claim that some people came from Serowe to call their village Matolwane is completely false.

The argument that the name of the village was not democratically arrived at is neither here nor there. Historically, names of villages have tended to be associated with events or names of places where people do settle. For example, when Bagammangwato moved from Shoshong to Palapye, they did not call their village, Shoshong. Similarly, when they went on to settle in their present village - Serowe, they did not name their new village Palapye just because by then they were from Palapye. I cannot recall any incidence from history or even the Bible, where people chose the name of their village by elections. When the four headmen (may their souls rest in peace) met to discuss the issue of a merger, I would like to believe that they all had the interest of their people at heart.

After all traditionally kings, chiefs and even headmen have always had the power to make decisions on behalf of their own people. Since the four headmen agreed by consensus that the villages should move to Matolwane Hill and that the new village be called Matolwane, their word must stand and be respected by all their people. Period!

In any agreement there are always two possibilities. It is either the agreement works or it fails. The people who relocated from the old Lesenepole village were not forced to move to Matolwane. If they now feel they are not part of the initial agreement to merge with the other three villages: they are still free to go back to their old site. Despite the fact that they claim to want to keep in touch with their past, they appear to be different from Roy Sesana and company, who are very clear on their desire to return to their ancestral land. Why is it that the Lesenepole people cannot do the same? I am sure if they were to ask to be allowed to go back to their old site, nobody will stand in their way. This route will be far cheaper and it will give room for the resources, which are now been wasted in legal battles, to be put to good use improving peoples' living conditions.
Is it not strange that they now want to falsify facts and want to deny the existence of the other three original small villages? Why do they have this imperial ambition to conquer and dominate? Why are they vigorously fighting for exclusive recognition at the expense of others? Is this line of thinking compliant with Vision 2016? Where do they stand as regards the national values of unity, tolerance and justice? My feeling is that, it is not' only the name that they are after. These people have a hidden agenda and the consequences would be too ghastly to bear if they were to succeed.

In conclusion, I would like to add that those who are loyal to the name Matolwane deserve peace and tranquility in their own village. They do not deserve the abuse and harassment they are currently subjected to. Children are born and in their birth certificates, it is a must to have a place of birth. Those who have reached the age of sixteen have to register for Omang, whre do they write as their place of birth? Is this the reward people of Raphiri, Matoposane and Moremi have to endure for supporting government policy? The answer to this question must be a big NO. Residents of Matolwane Village deserve to be free from anxiety and they must be spared the agony of going through an election, which will only serve to legitimise cheating and falsehood.

Readibona Dilo
Village with no name