Botswana has widely been acclaimed as the oldest and one of the most successful democracies in Sub-Saharan Africa, and an example of economic development, functioning governance and a multiparty democracy, whose exceptionality makes it a hopeful model for other African countries. While the country has done comparatively well in sticking to its democratic agenda, through it improving the social, economic and political conditions of the population, democracy was put to test in the past two decades. Since the 1990s, minority groups, amongst them the Basarwa, have demanded revision of certain sections of the constitution to make them tribally neutral, and have demanded their right to elect their own chiefs and nominate their own representatives to the House of Chiefs. For the Basarwa, however, the right to have access to community structures to express their needs and views regarding land, representation, and conditions of their children’s education has been of primary importance. Given the complex history of their discrimination, they have often come close to demanding alternative avenues for participation in community affairs only to learn that there is only one village kgotla or public assembly, one clinic, one school, etc., which they have to associate with or go back to their nomadic lives, the latter being a futile proposition under modern land and fauna regulatory regimes. This paper, using the historical data, examines the political and civic avenues for political participation available to minority groups in general and Basarwa in particular, and shows that the structural imposition at community level based on the dominant model of the Tswana groups systematically excludes many minority groups, more particularly Basarwa, from community participation. This amounts to the denial of their human and democratic rights.

Botswana has widely been acclaimed as the oldest and one of the most successful democracies in Sub-Saharan Africa, and an example of economic development, functioning governance and a multiparty democracy, whose exceptionality makes it a hopeful model for other African countries. In 2009, Botswana held its 10th successful general elections since its independence in 1966. According to several commentators and scholars, this democratic success story emerged as an outcome of the negating of two regimes—traditional chiefly rule and the colonial (protectorate) regimes—which had independently and collaboratively oppressed the majority of the population. They had stratified the population according to their race, ethnic origin and culture. This consequently denied some groups access to resources, including political participation in community and national affairs.

The Basarwa, derogatively called Bushmen (not women), were among the most politically, economically and socially marginalized groups. On gaining independence, the slogan was “there is no Bushmen anymore, we are all equals.” Although Botswana has done comparatively well in sticking to its democratic agenda, through it improving the social, economic and political conditions of the population, democracy was put to test in the past two decades. Since the 1990s, minority groups have demanded revision of certain sections of the constitution to make them tribally neutral, and have demanded their right to elect their own chiefs and nominate their own representatives to the House of Chiefs. For the Basarwa, however, the right to have access to community structures to express their needs and views regarding land, representation, and conditions of their children’s education has been of primary importance. Given the complex history of their discrimination, they have often come close to demanding alternative avenues for participation in community affairs only to learn that there is only one village kgotla or public assembly, one clinic, one school, etc., which they have to associate with or go back to their nomadic lives, the latter being a futile proposition under modern land and fauna regulatory regimes.

International Relations Journal, Ethnic Conflict in Nepal, Ethnic Communities, Ethnic Divisions, Madhesi Community, Systematic Discriminatory Treatment, Democratic System, Decision-Making Process, Policy Planning Process, Socioeconomic Development, Economic Exclusion, Indigenous Nationalities Movement.