�Khama�s argument is flawed�


Contrary to President Ian Khama’s assertion that his decision to suspend the four judges is not reviewable, the judges argue that there is a case law that supports the proposition that such decisions are reviewable.

The judges also say it is incorrect that the applicants have not demonstrated that a review of the President’s decision to suspend has sound prospects of success. “In this case, the decision to suspend and the decision to establish the tribunal were unlawful and unconstitutional. There are strong prospects that the President’s decisions will be set aside on the ground that they are unlawful and irrational,” wrote Justice Key Dingake in his replying affidavit.

The quartet: Dingake, Modiri Letsididi, Mercy Garekwe and Ranier Busang, contend that Khama has exercised his discretion to suspend them in terms of Section 97 of the Constitution in a manner that is proper and lawful.

Editor's Comment
GBV: The big elephant in the room

Sadly, the country seems not to have proper tools and the extent to which women and the girl-child are being abused is not adequately measured.Almost every week there are reports of women being attacked by their significant others and while men are attacked as well, women seem to be more on the receiving end.On May 24, 2023 news broke that a woman who was receiving support from the Botswana Gender-Based Violence Prevention Centre in Gaborone, was...

Have a Story? Send Us a tip
arrow up