On Monday the High Court delivered judgment in a constitutional challenge to the Adoption of Children Act. The Act permits a child who is born out of wedlock to be adopted by a third party without the consent of the child’s biological father.
Geoffrey Khwarae and his attorney, Uyapo Ndadi are of the view that Judge Dingake’s ruling which declared Adoption of Children Act unconstitutional is a victory for all men. Ndadi and his clients wanted the Court to determine whether Botswana’s law protects the interests of children, who are ultimately the ones who bear the burden in such a case.
Ndadi, a celebrated human rights lawyer, is pleased with the outcome of the case. The judgment set aside the Adoption of Children as it goes against the country’s constitution. Unlike many other lawyers, Ndadi has developed a predilection for human rights cases involving families.
Before practicing as an attorney, Ndadi was at the helm of Botswana Network on Ethics, Laws and HIV/AIDS (BONELA), as its Executive Director an organization that promotes a just and inclusive environment to prevent HIV infection and provide a greater quality of life for people affected by HIV and AIDS making sure that people living with HIV/AIDS’s rights are protected.
Khwarae had approached Ndadi to act on his behalf in his endeavor to prevent his minor child from being adopted against his wishes. Through his lawyers, he challenged the constitutionality of section 4(2) (d)(i) of the Adoption Act in so far as it does not require the consent of a biological father to a child born out of wedlock regardless of the child’s best interests. He asked that the Court declare the provision unconstitutional and issue an order that his child may not be adopted without his consent.
“It is not a one man victory, it is a victory which shall be celebrated by all men,” Khwarae told Weekend Post shortly after the High Court ruling. He observed that it is common that women tend to bully man when it comes to child custody. “Women usually have the children adopted without the consent of their biological fathers,” he stated.
Meanwhile, Ndadi is convinced that the judgment is monumental and timely, “Not only will this case enhance our jurisprudence, it will also impact on people’s lives,” he said.
“At the heart of any adoption case henceforth, the primary factor will be what is in the child’s best interest.”
This is not the first time that Ndadi challenged the constitutionality of an Act of Parliament, in 2013, the then BONELA Director argued against the new Public Health Act, which forced people to reveal their HIV/AIDS status to close relatives and their sexual partners, failing which a person is deemed to have committed an offense punishable by law.
Indeed, it was not just victory for Khwarae and Ndadi after Judge Dingake delivered a verdict in their favour, to a larger extent all men in Botswana breathed a sigh of relief. The same euphoria was experienced from the public and the organizations which had have similar view on the rights of the fathers and children.
“The judgment brings Botswana’s adoption laws in line with more progressive Children’s Act of 2009 that places the child’s best interest at the heart of issues concerning the child,” said Cindy Kelemi, the incumbent Director of BONELA.
All along, Khwarae and his lawyer were convinced that they had a strong case which could set aside part of the Adoption of Children Act.
Khwarae is irked by the section which does not require his consent in the event of adoption of his daughter because he was not married to the mother of the daughter. His lawyer, Ndadi put up a solid argument that the Act denied Khwarae his freedom from discrimination, freedom from inhumane and degrading treatment, “Tomorrow it could happen to another man, that is why we must cherish this judgment,” said Khwarae, “We are still waiting to see if the state will appeal the judgment or not.”
On the losing side, Moloise from the Attorney General’s Chambers had argued that the Adoption Act does not discriminate against fathers on the basis of their sex. At most, he said, the Act discriminates against unmarried persons as opposed to married persons, and marital status is not a ground of discrimination.
He further argued that any discrimination was nevertheless constitutionally justified and reasonable taking into account the historical origins of the adoption law. These origins, he argued, are embedded in the common law and customary law which provide that parental power is acquired through lawful wedlock.
The institution of marriage, he argued, is a phenomenon deeply revered and entrenched in Botswana culture. The notion of the “legitimacy” of the child is an intimate part of this culture, he submitted, the preservation of which justifies the discrimination against fathers.
Moloise added that the Adoption Act may be insulting towards unmarried fathers but is by no means inhuman or degrading. In addition, he argued, the right to a fair hearing extends only to criminal trials and is not a right enjoyed in the civil context. His contention was that while the 2009 Children’s Act extends the role of biological fathers in the lives of their children born out of wedlock, it does not confer on fathers the right to consent to their children’s adoption.
Botswana Network on Ethics, Law and HIV/AIDS (BONELA) and other civic organisations are advocating for law reform in child adoption to ensure that it is aligned with the principles enshrined in the Children’s Act of 2009.
“International and regional human rights law requires that the child’s best interests be of paramount importance in all issues concerning the child. In cases where fathers have played a positive and active part in their child’s life, it is generally not in the child’s best interests to terminate that relationship by adoption against the father’s wishes,” says Anneke Meerkotter, Litigation Director at the Southern Africa Litigation Centre (SALC), which is providing assistance on the case.
While there is no hard-and-fast rule in politics, former Molepolole North Member of Parliament, Mohamed Khan says populism acts in the body politic have forced him to quit active partisan politics. He brands this ancient ascription of politics as fake and says it lowers the moral compass of the society.
Khan who finally tasted political victory in the 2014 elections after numerous failed attempts, has decided to leave the ‘dirty game’, and on his way out he characteristically lashed at the current political leaders; including his own party president, Advocate Duma Boko. “I arrived at this decision because I have noticed that there are no genuine politics and politicians. The current leaders, Boko and President Dr Mokgweetsi Masisi are fake politicians who are just practicing populist politics to feed their egos,” he said.
Former Botswana Democratic Party (BDP) parliamentary hopeful, Lawrence Ookeditse has rejected the idea of taking up a crucial role in the Botswana Patriotic Front (BPF) Central Committee following his arrival in the party this week. According to sources close to development, BPF power brokers are coaxing Ookeditse to take up the secretary general position, left vacant by death of Roseline Panzirah-Matshome in November 2020.
Ookeditse’s arrival at BPF is projected to cause conflicts, as some believe they are being overlooked, in favour of a new arrival. The former ruling party strategist has however ruled out the possibility of serving in the party central committee as secretary general, and committed that he will turn down the overture if availed to him by party leadership.
Ookeditse, nevertheless, has indicated that if offered another opportunity to serve in a different capacity, he will gladly accept. “I still need to learn the party, how it functions and all its structures; I must be guided, but given any responsibility I will serve the party as long as it is not the SG position.”
“I joined the BPF with a clear conscious, to further advance my voice and the interests of the constituents of Nata/Gweta which I believe the BDP is no longer capable to execute.” Ookeditse speaks of abject poverty in his constituency and prevalent unemployment among the youth, issues he hopes his new home will prioritise.
He dismissed further allegations that he resigned from the BDP because he was not rewarded for his efforts towards the 2019 general elections. After losing in the BDP primaries in 2018, Ookeditse said, he was offered a job in government but declined to take the post due to his political ambitions. Ookeditse stated that he rejected the offer because, working for government clashed with his political journey.
He insists there are many activists who are more deserving than him; he could have chosen to take up the opportunity that was before him but his conscious for the entire populace’s wellbeing held him back. Ookeditse said there many people in the party who also contributed towards party success, asserting that he only left the BDP because he was concerned about the greater good of the majority not individualism purposes.
According to observers, Ookeditse has been enticed by the prospects of contesting Nata/Gweta constituency in the 2024 general election, following the party’s impressive performance in the last general elections. Nata/Gweta which is a traditional BDP stronghold saw its numbers shrinking to a margin of 1568. BDP represented by Polson Majaga garnered 4754, while BPF which had fielded Joe Linga received 3186 with UDC coming a distant with 1442 votes.
There are reports that Linga will pave way for Ookeditse to contest the constituency in 2024 and the latter is upbeat about the prospects of being elected to parliament. Despite Ookeditse dismissing reports that he is eying the secretary general position, insiders argue that the position will be availed to him nevertheless.
Alternative favourite for the position is Vuyo Notha who is the party Deputy Secretary General. Notha has since assumed duties of the secretariat office on the interim basis. BPF politburo is expected to meet on 25th of January 2020, where the vacancy will be filled.
Botswana Democratic Party (BDP) big wigs have decided to cancel a retreat with the party legislators this weekend owing to increasing numbers of Covid-19 cases. The meeting was billed for this weekend at a place that was to be confirmed, however a communique from the party this past Tuesday reversed the highly anticipated meeting.
“We received a communication this week that the meeting will not go as planned because of rapid spread of Covid-19,” one member of the party Central Committee confirmed to this publication. The gathering was to follow the first of its kind held late last year at party Treasurer Satar Dada’s place.