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
Botswana deserves ideal political leaders

This remains to be seen, particularly as opposite unity has been seeing its ups and downs. In 2012, three opposition parties namely the Botswana National Front (BNF), the Botswana Movement for Democracy (BMD), and the Botswana National Front (BNF) formed a political alliance under the Umbrella for Democratic Change (UDC). The Botswana Congress Party (BCP) would, after rebuffs, join the coalition in 2017.The promise made by the coalition to its...

Have a Story? Send Us a tip
arrow up