FRAGILE DEMOCRACY II: THE NOTORIOUS AXE AND ITS SILENCING EFFECT

Earlier on this year, many of us were shocked when Permanent Secretary Solomon Sekwakwa was unceremoniously released from civil service along with his deputy, Sinvula. The question of why the two were dismissed in the way they were, remains unanswered. Their releases occurred shortly following the declaration of the first State of Emergency in response to the international pandemic. What was a greater shock was that the nation had been informed that employees would not, for the period of the SoE be dismissed from their employment by their employers. The unexplained dismissals, some have proposed, remained a haunting yet telling ghost of how intolerance and disagreement are treated in the government enclave. It was rumoured that there was an unpleasant relationship between the duo and the Covid-19 coordination team, headed by Dr.Kereng Masupu. It is alluded that this, amongst other things,caused friction between them and the first citizen, allegedly resulting in the termination of the employment of Permanent Secretary and his Deputy.

The notorious axe, recently struck again, and this time, it is speculated, it struck in response to an expression of praise to the country’s various leaders. Attorney Nchunga Nchunga was fired from his position as Deputy Permanent Secretary of the Ministry of Defence Justice and Security. The lawyer’s sacking happened shortly after her released praise songs about leader of the opposition Dumelang Saleshando, as well as a song for Biggie Butale, leader of the Botswana Patriotic Party and another song about the previous president Seretse Khama Ian Khama. The songs, communicate his opinions about the leaders as persons of influence in the country, not particularly as political leaders.

He recognises that each of them has played a significant role in Botswana being what it is. These songs come after a year of the lawyer/singer composed quite a number of songs about the president of the country, President Mokgweetsi Masisi, and another album dedicated to the country itself, in commemoration of the nation ascending to 50years of independence. This is all to say, there is a well established background of the lawyer expressing himself in ways that celebrate those he believes are worthy of being celebrated, without the imputation of political party affiliation.

In fact, with over five songs in honor of the incumbent president, it would only be safer to assume his allegiance is certainly with the country’s current leadership. Should this affect how he views other leaders? Freedom of expression is very delicate in a democracy, and even more so, for government employees or civil servants. It indeed has its limitations. The question lies to what extent can it be allowed to be limited in a way that would not make the limitations unreasonable?

As a starting point, fundamental rights ensure the protection of liberties and freedoms of citizens against invasion by the state. In essence, they are there to protect us against the state, and to avoid the establishment of authoritarian and dictatorial rule in the country. They make up the backbone of the country, and enable all people to participate in the political affairs of the state. Beyond voting, participation in political affairs takes different forms, including campaigning, petitioning (by signing or instituting petitions), joining political parties, and becoming involved in pressure groups. Not all these are available to civil servants, who are generally sterilised from participation in politics. In fact, in Botswana, as in many other democracies, civil servants are expected to not be overtly political in a partisan sense, or to publicly advocate or advance the position of any political party. Most civil servants are precluded from partaking in political activity, whilst employed and are further precluded from holding political office and displaying party insignia or campaigning in active politics.

All freedoms and rights can be surrendered by the consent of the person who holds them, if such person voluntarily agrees to surrender the said rights. The contractual relationship between government as an employer, and the employee so employed signed on consent, implies that the parties have agreed to abide by the terms and conditions of the agreement. Government employees therefore cannot be expected to be publicly politically partial. The question then becomes what taking part in party politics is.

I do not believe that the obligations of civil servants preclude sthem from holding political opinions, or from recognising when a Member of Parliament has notably stood against corruption. It does not preclude one from recognising a former president’s work where it benefited the country.

I wonder, is our democracy so fragile, and so delicate that mere songs about Saleshando or Butale of Khama’s public image, would be scathed by it?! Surely not! Yes, we do know that music is a revolutionary tool, when used to incite a revolution, as was seen in the anti-apartheid movement of our neighbouring South Africa. That said, I do not think music intended merely to recognise the ways our leaders have worked together to make our country what it is is threatening. If it is, then perhaps our problems as a nation are much deeper. Tolerance is at the heart of our apparent national culture. It means we are accommodative of different perspectives. This is the very basis for our democracy. Where we soil it with silencing attempts, we bring to question our own intergrity and dignity, and therein lies a problem.

Freedom of expression is a fundamental characteristic of modern democratic states. Included in this central right are freedom to hold opinions, as well as the freedoms to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority. I dare say a democratic state is not possible without freedom of expression.

I think we must reflect on the following: Have we as a Nation divorced ourselves from the values of our constitutional freedoms, I wonder?! Why are we harsh when it comes to people expressing the truth as they see it? Does it mean civil servants have no opinions and cannot enjoy their freedom of expression or have we become overly sensitive and allergic to the truth? Or maybe we-have a worse incurable pandemic of intolerance and hypocrisy.

Whatever the real reason many be, the chilling effect of silencing critics and thinkers is regressive and dents our human rights record. We must urgently reflect as a Nation and have a genuine conversation about these unlawful dismissals of senior civil Servants who now live in fear of uncertainty and fear of the unknown. All eyes are on the office of The President to protect the constitution as per the presidential oath. It would be unthinkable and shocking for the office of the president to be the biggest violator of our constitution as well as other laws including labour and employment laws.