World over, trade unions are known to be the voice of people’s aspirations, particularly when labour is confronted by political opportunists, as is the case now in Botswana. Circumstances bordering on authoritarianism, dictatorship, unilateralism, populism and undemocratic regimes prompt trade unions to partner with political parties to usher democratic dispensation.
African countries have gone through different political engagements with political parties, which Botswana trade unions have so far evolved only through two phases. According to South African emeritus professor Eddie Webster there are four types of political party and trade union partnerships. Botswana as a country has moved through two different partnership types, which were evidenced in 2014 and 2019 general elections, respectively.
The first phase occurred in 2014 General Elections when Bofepusu made a public pronouncement to rally behind Umbrella Democratic Congress (UDC). BOFEPUSU backed the UDC comprising of three opposition political parties in their pursuit to upstage BDP, which has been in power since independence. Bofepusu had a backing of public workers normally at loggerhead with the government for not heeding to their call of improving conditions of services. 2014 General elections saw the opposition ushering an increased number of opposition parliamentarians due to Bofepusu support. The union further declared war on the BCP for allegedly betraying the opposition parties’ cooperation project, for staying put of opposition conglomeration. The Federation said it wanted to end the BDP’s alleged abuse of the working class. (WeekendPost, Botswana, 2014).
Trade union leaders worked with the opposition by attending meetings and probably covert financial support. South African Congress of South African Trade Unions (COSATU) and African National Congress (ANC) coalition is more advanced than of Bofepusu and UDC, which was more cordial and emotive based. Bofepusu leadership remained confident that once UDC attain power, they will be rewarded with political positions as characterised by political parties and trade union partnerships across the globe. Equally, the UDC then has enticed the Federation leadership into governance structures. Further trade union iconic figure Comrade Andrew Motsamai was lured to contest for Gaborone Central constituency, which he declined due to uncertain elections outcome.
Immediately after BOFEPUSU’s realisation, the Federation embarked on Thabathula retreat, ultimately undertaking a decision to, “Appointment of Political Lobby and Advocacy group/team (PLAG).” The group was to identify specific issues of national interest, make robust research, formulate sound position papers and identify legislators capable to motivate motions at National Assembly or find a public figure capable to effect change in a communal domain. The group had to make visitations to various workplaces to address and influence members take decisions that are of national interest.
Even to pressurise legislators or the government against taking specific conclusions. The group had to work independently from the leadership for it to perfectly work well without undue duress. Over time, the leadership disregarded the idea of PLAG on the basis of simply being clouded with excessive powers. The leadership was so consumed with powers that they adopted a common-sense approach to tackle issues of national interest.
The main reason why Bofepusu enters 2019 General Elections as a feeble player, is due to inability to execute their establishment mandate. Firstly, the Federation vowed to, “Formulate and promote comprehensive workers agenda with full participation of workers themselves.” A deliberate attempt to a collective decision making has been a far-fetched reality for the Federation. There have been insignificant attempts by the Federation to source decisions from affiliate members when the organisation was confronted with dilemmas, especially the furfure surrounding Public Service Bargaining Council (PSBC). There had been snippets of occasions where the Federation converged special congresses to get resolutions over salary negotiation saga. Sadly, decisions were normally concluded by the leadership and members cajoled to accept agreements relayed by influential leaders.
Similarly, Thabathula declaration motivated that the Federation, “Will not affiliate to any political party but vote as a block.” Unfortunately this strategic perspective was side-lined immediately after the leadership crossed the border back into the country. No matter how the Federation sounds smart and cunningly they had taken a stubborn stance to align to UDC during 2014 National Elections. The leadership published a hit-list comprising of unwanted political enemies of the struggle. Messages were spread across the country not to cast votes for the earmarked political culprits. The leadership publicly pronounced that Bofepusu has taken a decision to support UDC and urged its members to add weight to the opposition party.
Major causality of 2014 hit list included Dumelang Saleshando whose party BCP was punished for not forming an opposition coalition. Daniel Kwelagobe for BDP also lost his constituency as he was part of the hit list. All Bofepusu affiliates bar Botswana Public Employees Union (BOPEU) backed the UDC. Bopeu distanced itself from the position, citing their public service obligation to serve under any political party in government.
BOFEPUSU leadership took a bold decision to rally behind UDC because they wanted a regime change, which Khama led government disregarded the PSBC by taking unilateral decisions to the detrimental of workers. Additional the employer through their mandate givers, disregarded BOFEPUSU’s proposals and never acceded to the demands despite economic burdens. “Any political party that appears to accede to workers’ demands will be rewarded with block votes by the Federation,” so says the Federation leadership. The UDC then, resonated with Bofepusu hence massive support towards a conglomeration of a political party.
Astonishingly, 2019 General Elections has taken another twist, Bofepusu leadership finds itself disintegrated amongst different political parties, which exacerbates the Federation leadership from taking a stance to support a political party. Unlike the 2014 General Elections were the whole Bofepusu leadership was behind UDC, this year’s elections brings another dilemma. The better part of Bofepusu leadership are Alliance for Progressives (AP) sympathisers, which has ditched the UDC due to matters bordering on principle, others support the BDP President Dr. MEK Masisi, who is seen as a messiah because of his nationalistic stances. In the mist of the leadership others are still clinging onto UDC.
BOFEPUSU UDC supporters have disdain for the current leadership, since they view them as sell-outs because of their stance to exonerate themselves from political alignment. Others in leadership think their counterparts are dishonest for not rallying behind Masisi’s BDP because he has shown tolerance towards workers by affording them negotiation space and affording assured consecutive salary hikes for the year 2019/2020. Though Masisi has shown snippets of good relations with workers organisations, such as acceding to their salary demands, his government has failed dismally to facilitate for resuscitation of the bargaining council. The proMasisi faction strongly believes that those anti him are being dishonest as the leadership has vowed to support any political party which appears to favour labour.
The opposing faction that supports the UDC postulates that it is not a matter of an individual accolades rather it is about his political party that has poor historical relationship with trade unions. The Federation is fragmented moving towards the general elections, the lowly paid bracket, mainly comprising of Manual Workers Union constituents, have vowed to cast a vote for Masisi’s party because of the P500 increment after PEMANDU talks conclusions. Others have sheer disdain for the former President who supports the UDC, and consequently opt to support Masisi’s party.
All these quandaries prompted Bofepusu to take a stance of not supporting any political party for the sake of saving faces, as they would have no answers to provide. But one may conclude that for now Bofepusu leadership are too sceptical to move with the UDC, would rather live with the devil they have wrestled with than the angel that promises better social-economic and pro-labour alternatives.
This is a question that should seriously exercise the mind of every Botswana citizen and every science researcher, every health worker and every political leader political.
The Covid-19 currently defines our lives and poses a direct threat to every aspect and every part of national safety, security and general well-being. This disease has become a normative part of human life throughout the world.
The first part of the struggle against the murderous depredation of this disease was to protect personal life through restrictive health injunctions and protocols; the worst possibly being human isolation and masks that hid our sorrows and lamentations through thin veils. We suffered that humiliation with grace and I believe as a nation we did a great job.
Now the vaccines are here, ushering us into the second phase of this war against the plague; and we are asking ourselves, is this science-driven fight against Covid-19 spell the end of pandemic anxiety? Is the health nightmare coming to an end? What happy lives lie ahead? Is this the time for celebration or caution? As the Non State Actors, we have being struggling with these questions for months.
We have published our thoughts and feelings, and our research reviews and thorough reading of both the local and international impacts of this rampaging viral invasion in local newspapers and social media platforms.
More significantly, we have successfully organised workshops about the impact of the pandemic on society and the economy and the last workshop invited a panel of health experts, professionals, and public administers to advance this social dialogue as part of our commitment to the tripartite engagement we enjoy working with Government of Botswana, Civil Society and Development partners. These workshops are virtual and open to all Batswana, foreign diplomatic missions based in Gaborone, UN agencies located in Gaborone and international academic researchers and professional health experts and specialists.
The mark of Covid-19 on our nation is a painful one, a tragedy shared by the entire human race, but still a contextually painful experience. Our response is fraught with grave difficulties; limited resources, limited time, and the urgency to not only save lives but also avert economic ruin and a bleak future for all who survive. Several vaccines are already in the market.
Parts of the world are already doing the best they can to trunk the pestilential march of this disease by rolling out mass-vaccinations campaigns that promise to evict this health menace and nightmare from their public lives. Botswana, like much of Africa, is still up in the disreputable, and, unenviable, preventative social melee of masked interactions, metered distances, contactless commerce.
We remain very much at the mercy of a marauding virus that daily runs amuck with earth shattering implications for the economy and human lives. And the battle against both infections and transmissions is proving to be difficult, in terms of finance, institutional capacities and resource mobilization. How are we prepared as government, and as citizens, to embrace the impending mass-vaccinations? What are the chances of us succeeding at this last-ditch effort to defeat the virus? What are the most pressing obstacles?
Does the work of vaccines spell an end to the pandemic anxieties?
Our panellists addressed the current state of mass-vaccination preparedness at the Botswana national level. What resources are available? What are the financial, institutional and administrative operational challenges (costs and supply chains, delivery, distribution, administering the vaccine on time, surveillance and security of vaccines?) What is being done to overcome them, or what can be done to overcome them? What do public assessments of preparedness tell us at the local community levels? How strong is the political will and direction? How long can we expect the whole exercise to last? At what point should we start seeing tangible results of the mass-vaccination campaign?
They also addressed the challenges of the anticipated emerging Vaccinated Society. How to fight the myths of vaccines and the superstitions about histories of human immunizations? What exactly is being done to grow robust local confidence in the science of vaccinations and the vaccines themselves? More significantly, how to square these campaigns vis-vis personal rights, moral/religious obligations?
What messages are being sent out in these regards and how are Batswana responding? What about issues of justice and equality? Will we get the necessary vaccines to everyone who wants them? What is being done to ensure no deserving person is left behind?
They also addressed issues of health data. To accomplish this mass-vaccination campaign and do everything right we need accurate and complete data. Poor data already makes it very hard to just cope with the disease. What is being done to improve data for the mass-vaccination campaign? How is this data being collected, aggregated and prepared for real life situation/applications throughout Botswana in the coming campaign?
We know in America, for example, general reporting and treatment of health data at the beginning of vaccinations was so poor, so chaotic and so scattered mainstream newspapers like The Atlantic, Washington Post and the New York Times had to step in, working very closely with civil society organizations, to rescue the situation. What data-related issues are still problematic in Botswana?
To be specific, what kind of Covid-19 data is being taken now to ready the whole country for an effective and efficient mass-vaccination program?
Batswana must be made aware that the end part of vaccination will just mark the beginning of a long journey to health recovery and national redemption; that in many ways Covid-19 vaccination is just another step toward the many efforts in abeyance to fight this health pandemic, the road ahead is still long and painful.
For this purpose, and to highlight the significance of this observation we tasked our panellists with the arduous imperative of analysing the impact of mass-vaccination on society and the economy alongside the pressing issues of post-Covid-19 national health surveillance and rehabilitation programs.
Research suggests the aftermath of Covid-19 vaccination is going to be just as difficult and uncertain world as the present reality in many ways, and that caution should prevail over celebration, at least for a long time. The disease itself is projected to linger around for some time after all these mass-vaccination campaigns unless an effort is made to vaccinate everyone to the last reported case, every nation succeeds beyond herd immunity, and cure is found for Covid-19 disease. Many people are going to continue in need of medications, psychological and psychiatric services and therapy.
Is Botswana ready for this long holdout? If not, what path should we take going into the future? The Second concern is , are we going to have a single, trusted national agency charged with the mandate to set standards for our national health data system, now that we know how real bad pandemics can be, and the value of data in quickly responding to them and mitigating impact? Finally, what is being done to curate a short history of this pandemic? A national museum of health and medicine or a Public Health Institute in Botswana is overdue.
If we are to create strong sets of data policies and data quality standards for fighting future health pandemics it is critical that they find ideological and moral foundations in the artistic imagery and photography of the present human experience…context is essential to fighting such diseases, and to be prepared we must learn from every tragic health incident.
Our panellists answered most of these questions with distinguished intellectual clarity. We wish Batswana to join us in our second Mass-vaccination workshop.
Today is International Women’s Day – it’s a moment to think about how much better our news diet could be if inequities were eliminated. In 1995, when the curtains fell in one of the largest meetings that have ever brought women together to discuss women in development, it was noted that women and media remain key to development.
Twenty-six years later, the relevant “Article J” of the Beijing Platform for Action, remains unfulfilled. Its two strategic objectives with regard to Women and Media have not been met. They are Increase the participation and access of women to expression and decision-making in and through the media and new technologies of communication
Promote a balanced and non-stereotyped portrayal of women in the media.
Today, as we mark International Women’s Day, it’s an indictment on both media owners and civil society that women remain on the periphery of news-making. They cannot claim equal space in either the structures of newsrooms or in the content produced, be that as sources of news or as the subjects of reports. Indeed, the latest figures from WAN-IFRA’s Women in News Programme show just one in five voices in news belong to women*, be they as sources, as the author or as the main character of the news report.
Some progress was evident several years back, with stand-out women being named as chief executive officers, editors in chief, managing editors and executive editors. But these gains appear short lived in most media organisations. Excitement has turned to frustration as one-step forward has been replaced with three steps backwards. In Africa, the problem is acute. The decision-making tables of media organisations remain deprived of women and where there are women, they are surrounded by men.
Few women have followed in the footsteps of Esther Kamweru, the first woman managing editor in Kenya, and indeed sub-Saharan Africa. Today’s standout women editors include Pamela Makotsi-Sittoni (Nation Media Group, Kenya), Barbara Kaija (New Vision, Uganda), Mary Mbewe (Daily Nation, Zambia), Margaret Vuchiri (The Monitor, Uganda), Joyce Shebe (Clouds, Tanzania), Tryphinah Dongwana (Weekend Post, Botswana), Joyce Mhaville (Independent Television -ITV, Tanzania) and Tuma Abdallah (Standard Newspapers,Tanzania). But they remain an exception.
The lack of balance between women and men at the table of decision making has a rollback effect on the content that is produced. A table dominated by men typically makes decisions that benefit men.
So today, International Women’s Day is a grim reminder that things are not rosy in the news business. Achieving gender balance in news and in the structure of media organisations remains a challenge. Unmet, it sees more than half of the population in our countries suffer the consequences of bias, discrimination and sexism.
The business of ignoring the other half of the population can no longer be treated as normal. It’s time that media leaders grasp the challenge, not only because it is the right thing to do, but because it also makes a whole lot of business sense: start covering women, give them space and a voice in news-making and propel them to all levels of decision making within your organisation.
We can no longer afford to imagine that it’s only men who make and sell the news and bring in the shillings to fund the media business. Women too are worthy newsmakers. In all of our societies, there are women holding decision making positions and who are now experts in once male-only domains such as engineers, doctors, scientists and researchers.
They can be deliberately picked out to share their perspectives and expertise and bring balance to the profile of experts quoted on our news pages. Media is the prism through which society sees itself and women are an untapped audience. So, as we celebrate International Women’s Day, let us embrace diversity, which yields better news content and business products, and in so doing eliminate sexism. We know that actions and attitudes that discriminate against people based on their gender is bad for business.
As media, the challenge is ours. We need to consciously embrace and reach the commitments made 26 years ago when the Beijing Platform for Action was signed globally. As the news consuming public, you have a role to play too. Hold your news organization to account and make sure they deliver balanced news that reflects the voices of all of society.
Jane Godia is a gender development and media expert who serves as the Africa Director of Women in News programme. WOMEN IN NEWS is WAN-IFRA’s ground-breaking programme to increase women’s leadership and voices in the news. It does so by equipping women journalists and editors with the skills, strategies, and support networks to take on greater leadership positions within their media. www.womeninnews.org
The eve of International Women’s Day presents an opportunity for us to think about gender equality and the long and often frustrating march toward societies that are truly equal.
As media, we are uniquely placed to drive forward this reflection and discussion. But while focusing on the challenges of gender in society, we owe it to our staff and the communities we serve to also take a hard look at the obstacles within our own organisations.
I’m talking specifically about the scourge of sexual harassment. It’s likely to have happened in your newsroom. It has likely happened to a member of your team. It happens to all genders but is disproportionately directed at women. It happens in every industry, regardless of country, culture or context. This is because sexual harassment is driven by power, not sex. Wherever you have imbalances in power, you have individuals who are at risk of sexual harassment, and those who abuse this power.
I’ve been sexually harassed. The many journalists and editors, friends and family members who I have spoken to over the years on this subject have also been harassed. Yet it is still hard for leaders to recognize that this could be happening within their newsrooms and boardrooms. Why does it continue to be such a taboo?
Counting the cost of sexual harassment
Sexual harassment is, simply put, bad for business. It can harm your corporate reputation. It is a drain on the productivity of staff and managers. Maintaining and building trust in your brand is an absolute imperative for media organisations globally. If and when a case gets out of control or is badly handled – this can directly impact your bottom line.
It is for this reason that WAN-IFRA Women in News has put eliminating sexual harassment as a top priority in our work around gender equality in the media sector. This might seem at odds with the current climate where social interactions are fewer and remote work scenarios are in place in many newsrooms and businesses. But one only needs to tune into the news to know that the abuse of power, manifested as verbal, physical or online harassment, is alive and well.
Preliminary results from an ongoing Women in News research study into the issue of sexual harassment polling hundreds of journalists in Sub-Saharan Africa and Southeast Asia indicate that more than 1 in 3 women media professionals have been physically harassed, and just under 50% have been verbally harassed. Just over 15% of men in African newsrooms reported being physically harassed, and slightly less than 1 in 4 reports being verbally harassed. The numbers for male media professionals in Southeast Asia are slightly higher than a quarter on both forms of harassment.
The first step in confronting sexual harassment is to talk about it. We need to strip away the stigma and discomfort around having open conversations about what sexual harassment is and isn’t. Media managers, it is entirely in your power to create dynamics in your own teams that are free from sexual harassment.
Publishers and CEOs, you set the organisational culture in your media company.
By being vocal in recognising that it happens everywhere, and communicating to your employees that you will not tolerate sexual harassment of any kind, you send a powerful message to your teams, and publicly. With these actions, you will help us overcome the legacy of silence around this topic, and in doing so take an important first step to create media environments that truly embrace equality.
Melanie Walker is Executive Director of Media Development of the World Association of News Publishers (WAN-IFRA). She is a creator of Women in News, WAN-IFRA’s ground-breaking programme to increase women’s leadership and voices in the news. It does so by equipping women journalists and editors with the skills, strategies, and support networks to take on greater leadership positions within their media. www.womeninnews.org