For a long time, opposition parties in Botswana have decried that there was an urgent need to amend the Electoral Act in order to level the political playing field. In the past, the Botswana Democratic Party (BDP) rejected a motion sponsored by the opposition for the counting of ballots (council and parliamentary) to take place in polling stations. Mmegi Correspondent LEBOGANG MOSIKARE asks if the BDP will this time give in this time following an intention by the opposition to table a similar bill
FRANCISTOWN: While the BDP rejected that motion in Parliament, its constitution stipulates that the counting of votes (council and parliamentary) should be carried out in polling stations as was the case during the recent BDP primaries. The Bill by the Leader of the Opposition (LoO), Dithapelo Keorapetse, wants the Electoral Act to be amended such that the counting of ballots should be done in polling stations, counting of Diaspora votes should happen immediately in polling stations and counting of early voting ballots should be done in polling stations or alternatively parties guard the ballot boxes until counting among others.
journal article entitled, “Botswana’s 2004 elections: Free and Fair” by David Sebudubudu, a professor of political science at the University of Botswana, and professor Bertha Osei-Hwedie, then a lecturer of International Relations, also at the UB, supports the arguments that were posited by the opposition for a very long time. The paper analyses the freeness and fairness of Botswana’s 2004 elections. It argues that although Botswana’s multiparty democracy has lasted longer than any other in Africa, its elections are free but not very fair. The fairness of Botswana’s elections have been an issue of controversy that has led to calls from the opposition for political reform. The problem lies in the fact that the election system, the electoral body and the political field work to the advantage of the party in power. The paper concludes that until these issues are addressed, the fairness of Botswana’s elections will remain problematic. In the past, the spokesperson of the Umbrella for Democratic Change (UDC), Moeti Mohwasa, had this to say about the need to reform the Electoral Act.
“The reforms are not sufficient. We continue to demand that the counting of votes should be done at polling stations. Also, there should be equal access by all contestants to State media, as well as public funding of political parties. The UDC is also against the involvement of security agents in the conduct of elections. Finally, the Revised SADC Principles and Guidelines Governing Democratic Elections should be implemented fully,” said Mohwasa. The president of the Botswana Congress Party (BCP), who is also the Member of Parliament (MP) for Maun West, Dumelang Saleshando, also echoed Mohwasa’ sentiments in September last year. According to Saleshando, the matter of electoral reforms was on the floor of Parliament in June 2023. “It is typical of the BDP to reject opposition motions. They have rejected the one calling for the counting of ballot papers at the polling stations. We know they will reject the one for the direct election of the president,” said Saleshando. Theories abound that Keorapetse’s motion will not see light. The opposition is of the firm view that the rejection of the counting of ballots by the BDP in polling stations is a classical example of the application of double standards. The opposition further opines that the BDP is afraid that it will be removed from power should it allow the counting of ballots to happen in polling stations. Is the BDP afraid of reforming out of power just like its fraternal organisation in Zimbabwe, Zanu-PF? In 2016, a similar request about electoral reforms in Zimbabwe was made by opposition parties in Zimbabwe.
In response to the concerns of the opposition, former cabinet minister, Professor Jonathan Moyo, said that the ruling Zanu-PF has no intention of creating an environment that will ensure it loses elections. “They want to put in place electoral reforms that will ensure that you lose and we win. And we are saying no. That will never happen anywhere in a modern constitutional democracy, that a political party that has come into a government on the back of a new negotiated constitution, on the back of a new negotiated Electoral Act, comes up with reforms that will reform it out of power. Because the reforms they’re talking about are clear codes to say come with reforms that will ensure that you’re out,” Moyo was widely quoted in the Zimbabwe media as saying.
In February this year, opposition parties blasted the Independent Electoral Commission IEC) following its benchmarking trip to Zimbabwe’s electoral management body, Zimbabwe Electoral Commission (ZEC), an institution marred by allegations of electoral fraud and malpractice. The opposition alleged that the IEC’s trip to Zimbabwe was a ruse to help the BDP to win the upcoming general election. Both the IEC and BDP have denied these allegations. The rejection by the BDP in Parliament for the counting of ballot papers to take place at national level in polling stations is in stark contrast to its constitution. Section 9 of the BDP (Primary elections rules and regulations and code of conduct) reads: “(a) All ballots shall be reconciled and counted at the polling station at which polling was done, and the results for that polling station announced thereof, without declaring the winner, unless there is only one polling station (b) The counting of ballot papers will be carried out at the place of such primary election and on the date of such primary election in the presence of all candidates or counting agents where possible and the results announced thereat (c) The results from all polling stations shall be submitted to a central point for compilation, verification and totalling up by the presiding/returning officer.
The returning officer shall after being satisfied that the ballots are correct, announce the results of the elections and declare the winners thereof...” Contacted for comment, BDP parliamentary Whip, Liakat Kablay, said that for now, he was in the dark about how his fellow BDP MPs will react to Keorapetse’s motion. “I don’t know how the BDP will react to Keoarapetse’s Bill because we don't know his reasons for coming up with such a Bill. The IEC has an inherent interest in the amendment of the Electoral Act ,which is different from a political organisation such as the BDP. If Keorapetse comes up with such a Bill, the IEC will also have to look at it and see if it is compatible with the Electoral Act or not. We can’t reject the motion if it’s okay and we will support Keorapetse,” said Kablay.