Keypoints:
- Raises concerns over shrinking civic space and ministerial accountability
- Questions diplomatic absence, private travel, and governance transparency
- Calls for leadership rooted in humility, dialogue, and institutional trust
Your Excellency,
Compliments of the new season.
I write to you with deep respect for the Presidency and with an unwavering commitment to the wellbeing of the Republic of Botswana. These reflections are grounded in public policy concerns, informed by personal experience, and shaped by the lived realities of ordinary Batswana who continue to bear the consequences of national decisions.
You assumed office with a promise to restore dignity, accountability, and inclusive governance. Many citizens, fatigued by years of institutional manipulation and public fear, believed your leadership would usher in a renewed national spirit—one where policy would be guided by fairness, transparency, and evidence-based decision-making.
Today, however, the public mood is unsettled.
Across students, parents, workers, traditional leaders, journalists, and civil society actors, there is a shared unease. These concerns are not partisan. They are grounded in daily experience and reflect a nation searching for responsible and compassionate governance. This letter therefore seeks not only to identify policy gaps, but to highlight the human realities behind them.
Institutional trust and the weight of memory
Public policy thrives on institutional trust. Under the previous administration, that trust was deeply eroded. I know this personally.
When I raised concerns about the misuse of security organs and the erosion of checks and balances, I was not met with dialogue but with punishment. I was harassed by senior officials instructed to ‘please superiors’ rather than follow the Public Service Act. I was targeted by law enforcement, summoned and intimidated by the Directorate of Intelligence and Security Services (DISS), repeatedly suspended, accused of insubordination, and framed for actions I did not commit.
These experiences were meant to break me. Instead, they strengthened my resolve to advocate for a Botswana free from fear.
When you rose to leadership, many believed such days were behind us. There was hope that public servants, activists, youth leaders, and journalists would no longer fear retaliation for speaking truth to power.
Yet today, citizens ask difficult but necessary questions:
Is this still the Botswana you promised?
Is this a country where citizens can speak freely without legal threats?
Or are we drifting back towards a culture of fear disguised as constitutional governance?
These are not emotional questions alone. They are public policy questions about civic participation, freedom of expression, and constitutional accountability.
Leadership, tone, and democratic space
Leadership is not defined only by decisions, but by tone.
Policy implementation flourishes in a climate where citizens feel safe to give feedback, Parliament exercises oversight without intimidation, journalists inquire freely, ministers account openly, and the President responds with humility rather than hostility.
A Setswana proverb reminds us:
‘Kgosi thothobolo o lela matlakala otlhe.’
A leader must have the heart to absorb all manner of pressure.
When citizens fear expressing grievances because they expect admonition or legal threats, public participation—the lifeblood of governance—dies. Botswana’s democratic strength has always rested on dialogue, not fear.
Ministerial accountability and public confidence
It has become a recurring pattern that when citizens demand accountability from Honourable Minister Lesego Chombo, your public response appears to defend the minister rather than engage the substance of the concerns raised. This approach is counterproductive.
Within the ministry, this posture has weakened service delivery. Officials perceive ministerial protection rather than performance expectations. Accountability demands directed at the office—not the individual—are deflected, even when they concern critical issues such as gender-based violence, youth unemployment, and social welfare delivery.
Public scrutiny of ministerial performance is not misogyny.
It is democracy.
It is policy oversight.
It is accountability.
Your leadership would be strengthened, not threatened, by insisting that ministers account openly and transparently.
A shrinking civic space
A worrying pattern has emerged:
Students raising concerns about allowances are met with condescension.
Journalists self-censor for fear of retaliation.
Civil society actors are warned through constitutional citations rather than engaged.
Opposition MPs are delegitimised based on education when exercising oversight.
Youth groups are dismissed as misguided when demanding delivery on campaign promises.
A nation that whispers its truth cannot correct its policy direction.
Diplomatic presence and statecraft
Your absence from recent multilateral engagements, including the G20, in favour of domestic political rallies has raised concern among citizens, diplomats, and policy experts. These forums shape decisions on global finance, debt relief, climate action, and development pathways that directly affect Botswana and Africa.
Equally concerning is the growing pattern of non-attendance at African Union engagements. Botswana’s diplomatic capital was built through principled presence, consistent engagement, and continental solidarity. That capital is fragile and can be lost quietly through absence.
Leadership requires showing up where power is negotiated and where Africa’s future is shaped.
Domestic policy commitments
On student allowances, you pledged P2,500 ($188). While TVET arrears were normalised, the promise remains unfulfilled. Public remarks dismissing students’ concerns have weakened youth-government trust.
On minimum wage, you pledged P4,000. Today, citizens seeking clarity are met with ridicule by political supporters, undermining labour policy credibility.
Delegitimising opposition MPs erodes parliamentary oversight.
Targeting journalists weakens media accountability.
Both undermine democratic governance.
Presidential conduct, travel, and governance risk
The Office of the President is a constitutional trust, not a personal platform. Extended private travel and reliance on private funding raise serious governance, ethical, and security concerns.
Prolonged absence weakens executive oversight, slows decision-making, and creates institutional hesitation. Private sponsorship risks blurring public interest and private influence, opening the door to subtle forms of state capture.
From a security perspective, privately funded travel exposes the Presidency to intelligence vulnerabilities, compromised communications, and unregulated access. Opacity around funding undermines transparency and parliamentary oversight.
Democracies do not collapse only through coups. They erode through the gradual normalisation of impropriety.
A call to leadership
Botswana’s democracy rests on three arms—the Executive, Legislature, and Judiciary—designed to restrain power, not echo it. When criticism is mistaken for hostility, accountability collapses.
For Botswana to move forward, I respectfully urge:
- Protect freedom of expression without intimidation.
- Encourage constructive criticism as a governance tool.
- Establish structured national dialogue platforms.
- Enforce transparent ministerial reporting.
- Model humility and emotional intelligence.
- Safeguard institutional independence.
- Lead with kgosi thothobolo wisdom.
Botswana yearns for leadership that listens, not leadership that intimidates.
I write not in anger, but with commitment to our country’s future. As someone who has survived state intimidation, I refuse silence in the face of national concern. I speak because I love Botswana and believe in its potential.
A nation is strongest when its citizens are unafraid.
Yours faithfully,
Dr. Baboloki Semele
A concerned and hopeful citizen of the Republic of Botswana
