The Landmark LM V AG Case And The Socially Argued "Morality"

“There is nothing reasonable and justifiable by discriminating against fellow members of our diversified society.” This statement is quoted from the recently decided LM v AG case.

That’s enough to make us halt our regular programming, and address this, at least for a week, before going back to our multidisciplinary approach to adolescence, wouldn’t you say? 

With a full bench, the Botswana High Court held at Gaborone, on June 11, 2019 handed down a groundbreaking, landmark, and I dare say revolutionary judgement that is sure to change lives. It is one of those times that one must commend the judiciary for upholding justice. Phased with the apparent task of balancing morals and the law, the Court rose to the occasion, proclaiming the independence of the judiciary, and the role it plays in ensuring not only that the law is administered, but also that the dispute on the morality argument, against the human rights position, is ensured.  Very early on in the judgement, the Court acknowledged the need to note that “what is morally good or bad to one person in the realm of sexual orientation, choice and preference, may not necessarily be so to another person, hence a happy and shining reflection of our plurality, diversity, inclusivity and tolerance to both majority and minority rights.” 

Editor's Comment
Doctor's orders can't be overemphasised

The walk serves to raise awareness of the prevalence and impact of using treatment to manage seizure attacks.While many are aware that epilepsy is a medical condition that requires specialised care by health practitioners, there are those who, unfortunately, have other ideas about the condition and often deny their children medical care.These individuals usually associate the medical condition with witchcraft and demonic attacks, and choose to...

Have a Story? Send Us a tip
arrow up