He maintains that the disputes are a sign of democracy. Ookeditse told The Monitor on Friday in an interview at the Francistown High Court, where some BPF activists have launched an application to force the party to reverse its decision to ditch the Umbrella for Democratic Change (UDC)—an opposition coalition—ahead of the 2024 General Election. They argue that the decision to dump the coalition was not procedural. Other members led by the National Executive Committee contend that the decision to quit the UDC was in order. The BPF was founded five years ago. Since then, its members have been a constant feature at the High Court, battling for the control of the party.
This has led to fears that frequent court battles may render the party an entity that is not worth voting for at the election or dent its credibility. To some, the constant court battles also point to weaker conflict resolution mechanisms in the party. “It depends largely on what you are dealing with. As a neutral party who is looking at it through a fair lens, it happens in the course of advancing democracy in an organisation (court battles). So, you can’t say to us it is a blot to the image of the organisation,” he told The Monitor. Ookeditse added that the court is part of an administrative process or stages of the party. “If you cannot reach an agreement then you go for arbitration through the courts then that is not something that cannot be looked at as unfair or an injustice to the image of the party.” He emphasised that BPF members have a right to go to court if they feel aggrieved by any decision taken by the party.
