565
SOUTHERN AFRICA
BOTSWANA
The Botswana Government does not recognize any specific
groups as indigenous to the country, maintaining instead that
all its citizens are indigenous. There are, however, peoples in
Botswana who consider themselves to be the country’s indigenous people, including the San (known in Botswana as the Basarwa). As of July 2008, the San, who are made up of dozens of
distinct groups, each with their own language, history and traditions, numbered some 52,000. These groups include the
Ju/’hoansi, Bugakhwe, //Anikhwe, Tsexakhwe, !Xoo, Naro,
G/wi, G//ana, Kua, Tshwa, Deti, ‡Khomani, ‡Hoa, =Kao//’aesi,
Shua, Danisi, and /Xaisa. The vast majority of San in Botswana
today combine small-scale agriculture and livestock raising
with rural industries and a small amount of hunting and gathering. In many ways, they are some of the poorest and most
marginalized members of Botswana society. Living in some 70
small settlements scattered across the country, as well as in
towns and on freehold farms, San have argued for greater access to land and resources. Other groups in Botswana who see
themselves as indigenous include the Nama, Khoesan-speaking
people who number approximately 1,500 and who reside mainly in the south-western part of the country, and the Balala, who
number 2,200 and who live in the southern part of Botswana,
many of them on the Molopo Farms in Southern District. The
percentage of people in Botswana who consider themselves to
be indigenous is 3.4%. There are no specific laws on indigenous
peoples’ rights in Botswana but the country has voted in favor
of the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples in 2007.
566
IWGIA - THE INDIGENOUS WORLD - 2009
The Universal Periodic Review of the human rights
situation
I
n early December 2008, the Government of Botswana presented its
national report on the human rights situation in the country to the
3rd session of the Universal Periodic Review (UPR) of the United Nations Human Rights Council. In the discussions that followed Botswana’s presentation, Botswana Government representative and Minister
of Defense, Justice and Security, Mr. Dikgakgamatso Seretse, responded to written questions put forward by various countries concerning
Botswana’s human rights situation and the treatment of minorities.
Mr. Seretse said that there was no discrimination against ethnic minorities in Botswana. He went on to say that the Botswana Government had implemented the Central Kalahari Game Reserve (CKGR)
Court Order fully. He also pointed out that additional consultations
were on-going with the residents and former residents of the reserve in
late 2008 and early 2009 and efforts were being made to reach amicable
solutions. As of the end of 2008, such amicable solutions had yet to be
reached.
Among the many recommendations made by the Working Group
of the UPR, Botswana was asked to take immediate action to 1) ensure
respect for the rights of the indigenous people living in the areas of
interest to companies active in the diamond business; 2) provide access
to land, and support for the residents of the Reserve, as specified in the
United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples, 3)
work with the land boards of the various districts in the country to
ensure equity in land allocation among all applicants for residential
land, arable land, grazing land, water sources and business sites; and
4) pursue a policy of mother-tongue language education in conjunction with the national languages of Setswana and English.1
Land and resource rights
A major challenge for the San and Bakgalagadi in 2008 was the failure
of the Government of Botswana to implement the decisions that had
SOUTHERN AFRICA
567
been reached in the Botswana High Court legal case involving the
rights of residents of the Central Kalahari Game Reserve (CKGR),
which was concluded on 13 December 2006. Although in 2006 the Botswana High Court judges awarded the former occupants of the game
reserve the right to reoccupation as well as the right to hunt in the reserve, government officials have continued to prevent people from
moving back and have, on several occasions, arrested those caught
hunting within the bounds of the reserve. Such has been their frustration that, in November 2008, a group of San appealed to Pope Benedict
XVI to support their cause. One person said, “We beg the Pope to help,
to pray for us so that government changes its attitude towards us and
568
IWGIA - THE INDIGENOUS WORLD - 2009
respects our rights as indigenous peoples of this land.”2 In 2008, small
groups of people quietly returned to the reserve, where they tried to
make a living as hunters and gatherers, supplementing their subsistence with food they brought with them or which they purchased in the
settlements on the peripheries of the reserve.
Despite the recommendation of the Botswana High Court that the
former residents of the CKGR be allowed access to Special Game Licenses, subsistence hunting licenses had yet to be implemented as of
the end of 2008. On 3 November 2008, President Ian Khama said in his
State of the Nation address to the Botswana Parliament: “The notion
on the part of some outsiders that any segment of our society wishes to
subsist today on the basis of a hunter-gathering lifestyle is, however,
an archaic fantasy.”3 The lack of legal clarity and understanding of the
subsistence hunting issue remains a sore point among the indigenous
peoples of Botswana.
Today, there are some 75 to 100 adults and children in the Central
Kalahari Game Reserve. They are facing major constraints because of
the lack of water as well as regular arrests of individuals for alleged
violations of fauna conservation laws. There was also a huge bush fire
in the Central Kalahari in September 2008 that destroyed many of the
trees, shrubs and grasses on which these people depend.
In 2008, the Government of Botswana allowed private tour companies to take sizable numbers of international visitors into the Central
Kalahari. G/wi, G//ana, and Kua San and Bakgalagadi have pointed
out the irony of large numbers of wealthy foreign tourists spending
time in the Central Kalahari, seeing animals and magnificent vistas,
driving around on delicate pan surfaces and fossil river beds and
drinking iced water when they themselves are not allowed to live,
have access to water or utilize the resources there.
Diamond mining to take place …. after all
The debate relating to the Central Kalahari Game Reserve centered
partly on the reasons why the Government of Botswana chose to relocate people outside of the reserve in the period between 1997 and 2002.
Botswana Government spokespersons explicitly rejected the charge
SOUTHERN AFRICA
569
that people were relocated because of diamond mining, arguing that
relocation was done for environmental conservation purposes, in order to facilitate development and poverty alleviation, and to ensure
adequate provision of social services.
While the Botswana Government maintained throughout the
lengthy High Court trial (2004-2006) that there were no plans to develop mines in the Central Kalahari, it was announced on 17 November 2008 that a mining company, Gem Diamonds, would be developing a diamond mine at Gope in the south-eastern part of the reserve, to
be operational by 2010. Gope used to be a traditional area of the Tsila,
a San group, and was also occupied in the past by G/wi, G//ana, Kua,
and Bakgalagadi.
Prior to this announcement, an environmental impact assessment
(EIA) had been carried out in 2008 by a South African company, Marsh
Environmental Services, on behalf of Gem Diamonds and the Government of Botswana. The EIA was done in two phases, the first of which
was a public consultation and scoping process; the second phase consisted of environmental and social assessments in the field.
The results of this environmental impact assessment were made
public in mid-November 2008, and accepted by the Botswana Government. One major concern regarding the EIA that was expressed by
non-government organization representatives and members of the
public was that it was carried out by an environmental company that
had individuals working for the mining company, which they saw as a
direct conflict of interest. Numerous former residents of the reserve
said that they were not consulted either by the company or the government. Finally, concerns were raised about the accuracy of some of the
environmental and socio-economic data in the EIA reports.
Community-based natural resource management and
livelihoods
Other indigenous groups in Botswana also faced challenges throughout the year. To take one example, the 600 Ju/’hoansi, San, and
Mbanderu of /Kae/kae in western Ngamiland, on the Botswana-Namibia border, were told in May 2008 that it was likely that the area they
570
IWGIA - THE INDIGENOUS WORLD - 2009
had gained rights over in 1997 would be re-zoned for photographic
safari purposes.
The /Kae/kae Tlhabololo Trust, a conservation and development
organization that is the oldest of its kind in Botswana, was in 1997
granted access to two community-controlled hunting areas by the
North West District Council and the government’s Department of
Wildlife and National Parks. These two areas, Ngamiland (NG) 4 and
5, cover some 16,916 square kilometers in north-western Botswana, an
area rich in natural, cultural and human resources. In the latter part of
2008, the Ju/’hoansi, Mbanderu and other people in /Kae/kae expressed concerns at the proposed land use change, which they felt
would limit hunting and gathering and access to the funds of the safari hunting operations that had earned the /Kae/Kae Tlhabololo
Trust and its members as much as 1,000,000 Pula (approximately
US$250,000) over the past 5 years (2003-2008). There were also fears on
the part of /Kae/kae residents that the G/wihaba Caves (also known
as Drotsky’s Caves), which lie inside NG 5, were going to be opened
up to larger numbers of tourists and the areas around the caves zoned
for conservation purposes, possibly as a World Heritage Site similar to
the Tsodilo Hills to the north, thus reducing access on the part of local
people, most of them Ju/’hoan San, to an area that had long been important to them.
Fears of resettlement
Many local people, the majority of them San, Bakgalagadi and other
minority groups, have in the past been required to relocate out of areas
where veterinary cordon fences were built. These fences were established in order to prevent livestock and wildlife movements and this
way prevent the spread of livestock disease. In 2008, debates continued as to whether to increase the numbers and distribution of veterinary cordon fences, which in the past were documented as having had
negative impacts on wildlife populations and thus on the subsistence
security and incomes of rural communities.
In 2008, indigenous and other residents of commercial ranching areas in Central, Kgalagadi, Kweneng, and North West Districts had to
SOUTHERN AFRICA
571
move out of areas that were leased for commercial livestock production. People also lost jobs on ranches as the owners downsized their
labor force. In the area between the Kgalagadi Transfrontier Park in
south-western Botswana and the Central Kalahari Game Reserve, the
on-going plans to create the Western Kgalagadi Conservation Corridor
(WGCC) continued to generate concerns that San and other people
would be required to move out of the government settlements that
were created for them in the 1970s and 1980s. Kgotla (council) meetings were held in several of the Corridor communities by government
officials in 2008, at which people were told that it was likely that they
would be relocated, something that local people were vehemently opposed to.
Language, education, gender and health issues
A serious educational obstacle for San and other linguistic minority
students and their parents is the Botswana government’s language
policy. An important part of Botswana’s state-building strategy since
independence in 1966 has rested upon the identification of all of its
citizens with the Batswana ethnic identity. The building of this national identity has relied heavily upon the promotion of Setswana as the
primary language of its citizens. Accordingly, the first years of schooling are taught in Setswana before switching to English as the medium
of instruction. There are no governmental provisions for mothertongue primary education for minority-language children in Botswana. As a result, some minority children face difficulties in school, and
drop-out rates are high. It is for these reasons that San and other minority groups would like to see the Botswana Government change its
language and education policies, aiming towards promoting cultural
and linguistic diversity. At least one advocacy group, RETENG, a multicultural coalition of organizations devoted to the promotion and
preservation of the linguistic and cultural diversity of Botswana, exists
to champion this cause. In September 2008, RETENG spokespersons
voiced protests at the failure of the Botswana state media to provide
programmes in indigenous languages.4
572
IWGIA - THE INDIGENOUS WORLD - 2009
While women’s rights have been officially recognized in Botswana,
there are still significant challenges to be overcome. Indigenous women continue to face severe constraints in terms of access to employment, credit and education. Gender-based violence, including beatings
and rape, is pervasive in Botswana, and indigenous women tend to be
the targets of this violence to a greater degree than is the case among
other groups, according to non-government organizations in Botswana.5 In addition, many of the children of indigenous people in Botswana, unlike the members of other groups, are sent to remote area
primary boarding schools, where girls and boys are sometimes mistreated by teachers and older students. In response to concerns such as
these, in June 2008 a gender-based violence project was launched by
three partner organizations in Botswana, Emang Basadi, Bana ba Letsatsi and Women against Rape in Maun.6
Indigenous peoples would like to see the Botswana Government
address the serious health issues that they face more directly, especially HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria. These diseases are increasing more rapidly among indigenous peoples than other groups, who
have greater access to health services and to Anti-Retroviral drugs
(ARVs) and other kinds of medication. According to a 2008 report,
around 300,000 children and adults aged 49 and under in Botswana are
HIV positive; however, as of September 2008, only around 117,000 people living with HIV had received ARV treatment.7 It was estimated by
one NGO representative in Botswana that less than a quarter of indigenous individuals with HIV had received ARVs. Indigenous peoples
in Botswana continue to maintain that they should be treated in the
same way as everyone else in the country.
q
Notes
1 Both the official report and the Draft Report of the UPR Working Group are
available on the UPR website: http://www.ohchr.org/EN/HRBodies/UPRMain.aspx
2 http://allafrica.com/stories/200812011247.html
3 Khama, Seretse Khama Ian, 2008: Empowering the Nation through Democracy, Development, Dignity, and Discipline. State of the Nation Address to the Opening of
the Fifth Session of the Ninth Parliament, Gaborone, 3 November 2008. Gaborone: Republic of Botswana.
SOUTHERN AFRICA
4
5
6
7
573
http://allafrica.com/stories/200809260138.html, see also http://www.reteng.
org
Many of these issues were addressed in discussions held at meetings in Botswana, the Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues of the United Nations and
at a symposium entitled ‘Southern Africa and the UN Declaration on the Rights
of Indigenous Peoples: How Can International Mechanisms Work in Local
Communities and Contexts?” organized by Jennifer Hays of the University of
Tromsoe, Norway and held at the 107th annual meetings of the American Anthropological Association (AAA), San Francisco, California, USA on November
21, 2008. See also Physicians for Human Rights, 2007: Epidemic of Inequality:
Women’s Rights and HIV/AIDS in Botswana and Swaziland. An Evidence-Based Report on the Effects of Gender Inequality, Stigma, and Discrimination. Boston: Physicians for Human Rights (PHR); Ida Susser, 2009: AIDS, Sex, and Culture: Global
Politics and Survival in Southern Africa. Hoboken, New Jersey: Wiley-Blackwell.
This project, which is entitled “Reducing Gender-Based Violence: Making the
Invisible Visible” receives financial support from the European Commission.
http://allafrica.com/stories/200806120925.html
UNAIDS, 2008: Report on the Global AIDS Epidemic. Cited on http://www.pepfar.gov/press/81551.htm
Robert K. Hitchcock is Professor and Chair in the Department of Anthropology at Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan, USA and is a
Board member of the International Work Group for Indigenous Affairs. Adrianne Daggett is a postgraduate archaeology student in the Department of
Anthropology at Michigan State University who worked in Botswana and
Namibia in 2008. Wayne A. Babchuk is a lecturer in anthropology in the
Department of Anthropology and Geography, University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Lincoln, Nebraska, USA.