It refuses to die in a country that does not have laws allowing for public political funding. Well, the ruling Botswana Democratic Party (BDP) in theory does not enjoy any political funding but in reality it has direct access to government resources in the form of vehicles and unparalleled State media coverage. It also has a parasitic relationship with all businesses in the local economy. So the patronage network spreads far and wide for the benefit of he ruling party.
Petitioning of the elections in Court is also another hot potato. Legal costs usually follow the event as a losing party must pay. In the petitions of elections just as in constitutional cases, we would argue that costs should not be awarded. In a democratic dispensation where a government derives its legitimacy from a fair and free electoral process, imposing costs when the legitimacy of a government is being questioned is shut out to the only peaceful avenue left to disputants. Once people’s voices are not heard, you create a potential for people to take the law into their own hands. The Courts appear to be penalising democracy and while we respect rule of law, Parliament needs to change these laws to allow free challenges of election results. Now there’s no political party funding and any party that challenges an election, especially with perceptions of institutionalised Judges, may have to be liquidated if it loses the matter. In the past the BDP won petitions against the Botswana National Front but never followed up costs. The BDP at the time when Daniel Kwelagobe was the secretary general understood the opposition was integral party of democracy and there was no need to punish them with extra costs. It is common cause that majority of opposition politicians fund the campaigns from their pockets. They sponsor democracy through their family and personal investments and such as has been the case since independence.
