Botswana’s political landscape is set for a seismic shift as the government moves to enact a ban preventing former President Ian Khama from active political participation in the lead-up to the 2024 general election. This move comes as part of a broader Cabinet White Paper, which is expected to be presented for adoption during the upcoming February Budget session of Parliament. The decision, which bars retired Presidents from engaging in politics, is seen as a direct blow to Khama, who now serves as the patron of the Botswana Patriotic Front (BPF).
The proposal has reignited the ongoing power struggle between Khama and his successor, President Mokgweetsi Masisi. It has sparked intense debate and criticism, with many observers viewing it as a targeted attempt to muzzle Khama’s political influence. The implications of this decision are significant, particularly against the backdrop of the upcoming elections and the escalating tensions between the involved parties.
Political analyst Kitso Morekisi noted the potential impact of the Cabinet’s recommendation, emphasizing the high stakes and its implications for Khama’s role within the BPF. Morekisi highlighted the underlying political maneuvering and the far-reaching consequences for both Khama and the BPF should the proposal be endorsed. The analyst also called for legislative clarity on the matter, underscoring the need for a formal legal framework to navigate the involvement of retired presidents in active politics.
The proposed move has drawn parallels with similar legislative restrictions in African countries like Kenya and Zambia, where laws exist to curtail the political activities of retired presidents. In Kenya, the Presidential Retirement Benefits Act of 2003 dictates a six-month limit on the involvement of retired presidents in political parties after leaving office. Meanwhile, the Zambian Former President Act outlines the circumstances under which a former president’s benefits and privileges can be withdrawn, including a return to active politics. These comparisons shed light on the broader regional context in which Botswana’s current developments are situated.
Responding to these developments, Khama’s spokesperson, Mogomotsi Kaboeamodimo, expressed the former President’s stance. However, due to connectivity challenges while traveling, the official response from Khama’s camp was not available at the time of publishing. The absence of Khama’s immediate response adds an element of anticipation to this unfolding political saga.
The looming decision’s potential to reshape Botswana’s political landscape and its contentious nature underscore the deep-rooted power dynamics and tensions at play. As the country braces for the forthcoming general elections, the outcome of this proposal stands to have far-reaching ramifications, with the eyes of both the domestic and international community fixed on the unfolding events.
