While government and other interested parties may celebrate the resolution of the longest case in Botswana's legal history, for the Basarwa, this does not seem to be the case at all. Some of the findings of the Lobatse High Court last year were that: Basarwa had been illegally and unconstitutionally made to leave their land. It found that the government had acted against the law when it stopped issuing hunting licenses to the inhabitants in 2002 and that what was done to the Basarwa was tantamount to condemning them to death. Though the court ruled that Basarwa had the right to go back to the CKGR, they have not been allowed access to borehole water. Neither have they been allowed to hunt in the reserve.
Basarwa also complain that: -
* We have been arrested, beaten and tortured for attempting to hunt
* Many of us have been told we need visitor permits to return to our own homes
* We have been given no assistance to fund our return home even though the government spent many hundreds of thousands of pula to evict us.
* Since the government acted illegally when it evicted us, surely it should pay for us to go back home? Since the passing of the judgment a year ago, instead of both parties, particularly government implementing the findings, a new war has emerged with Basarwa accusing the government accusation of illegal arrest and torture by government.
While one may not testify to the veracity of the allegations, it is clear that they do not sit well in the spirit of amicable resolution of the CKGR controversy. Neither does it help to build compromise between government and the aggrieved party. One would have thought that the government would use the opportunity presented by the judgment to resolve the CKGR issue and engage other neutral parties in a healing process to ensure that the matter is resolved in an amicable manner. One hopes that perhaps, in the coming year, government will adopt a conciliatory tone and critically evaluate its approach to the CKGR issue with a view to resolving the matter once and for all. The time and resources consumed before the courts demonstrate how costly the matter was. There is need for an approach that reduces time and resources in the resolution of the matter.
Dialogue and compromise would help.
