Everywhere I go people say to me, ‘Thank you. We are really thankful for a job well done’ . Such is their excitement that many of them go the extent of shaking my hand and giving me a hug. The people hail the leaders of the UDC for a spectacular electoral performance, but I always reply by saying; ‘give yourself a pat on the back because, in the final analysis, it is your victory, you made it happen’.
In Gabane I was among the mainly youthful voters who braved the scotching heat and stood in the queue for over 8 hours in order to cast their ballot. That is how determined people were to embrace change. Newly elected Molepolole legislator Mohamed Khan put it more succinctly by saying, ‘it was our collective effort’.
Strictly speaking, history is made by the ordinary people, and not individual leaders – for no individual, however intelligent and strong-will, can alter the main course of historical events. If history was made by individual leaders this country would have long undergone a revolutionary transformation under the leadership of people like Dr Kenneth Koma of the BNF or Phillip Matante of the BPP.
But the subjective conditions for change did not exist at that time. Leaders who appear to shape the main course of events are those who come as the last link in the concatenation of supra-individual circumstances and correlation of social forces that drive the change process. Such leaders are like the straw that breaks the camel’s back or the drop that overflows the cup.
Those who believe that individual leaders are the locomotives of history claimed that the defection of former BNF and BMD leaders like Isaac Mabiletsa, Akanyang Magama, Mephato Reatile, Samson Moyo, Botsalo Ntuane to the BCP and BDP sounded the death knell of the UDC.
The masses have just proved them wrong. Many of these political turncoats were rejected by the masses during the elections. Of course, people do not make history at will, but rather under definite objective conditions and a historically determined mode of production. We owe the voters of Gaborone Central a special debt of gratitude for paying their best tribute to one of our fallen and illustrious heroes of the UDC, Comrade Gomolemo Motswaledi, by voting for the UDC – a movement about which he was very passionate. He paid the ultimate and supreme prize i.e. he paid with his very precious life for the victory we are celebrating today.
Of the masses that supported us in our formidable electoral xbattle with the BDP regime I wish to single out the working class – the five workers unions organized under the banner of BOFEPUSU for special commendation. BOFEPUSU is a trade union federation of five unions namely, BLLAHWU, Manual Workers Union, BTU, BOSETU and BOPEU.
To the historical partnership between UDC and BOFEPUSU, we say bravo! Hats-off to BOFEPUSU! My most abiding memory from the 2014 general election was to share the political platform with Comrade Johnson Motshwarakgole representing BOFEPUSU. Not even the wavering and vacillating tendencies of the traditionally conservative BOPEU bureaucratic leadership can alter this historic fact.
It remains to be seen if the BOPEU trade bureaucracy represents their own interests or those of their membership. The BOFEPUSU trade union federation must be applauded for having plucked-up courage to forge a historic partnership with the UDC in the .just ended general election.
Of course, in the run-up to the 1994 general elections there was an unwritten alliance between the BNF and Emang Basadi which contributed in no small measure to the good electoral showing of the BNF evidenced by the capturing of an unprecedented 13 seats in parliament. The was BNF poised to capture state power in the 1999 general elections but this was largely tacit endorsement of the BNF by the women’s movement.
This time the working class movement took up the cudgels and stood side by side with the UDC activists in the battle trenches against the BDP regime and put their very lives on the line. Not even the mysterious death of BMD honcho Comrade Gomolemo Motswaledi intimidated them. This time around not only did the unions play a pivotal role in the formation of UDC but they also actively campaigned for it.
This all dates back to the 2011 public sector strike or ‘school of war’ when their demands for a 16% salary hike were dismissed with bluster and reckless abandon by the Khama regime. In the famous words of Frederick Engels, strikes are ‘the military school of the workingmen in which they prepare themselves for the great struggles which cannot be avoided… and as schools of war, the unions are unexcelled’.
Perhaps the single most important outcome of the public sector strike is that it taught workers, not through theories delivered by some revolutionary politicians, but through their own battles with the arrogant but shortsighted Khama regime that salvation can only come about if unions took a clear principled stand on politics.
Salvation will only come when all the trade unions get together and write a Workers Charter of Botswana beginning with, ‘We the workers of Botswana demand that…’ Salivation will only come when all the workers, irrespective of their different employers, come to the realization that they are all oppressed by the same ruling class. And indeed salvation will only come when workers and poor peasants come to the realization that they are all oppressed and exploited by the same bourgeoisie both in towns and the rural hinterland and forge a worker-peasant alliance.
Writing on the historic public sector strike of 2011 I observed that ‘. If any one has a sense of triumphalism because the 16% wage hike has not been granted then they are only celebrating a pyrrhic victory. There are no winners and losers in this battle.
The impact on the country’s rapidly deteriorating democratic credentials has been massive and the damage will only become clear when the country goes to the polls. If this government is unwilling to pay the money prize, it must be made to pay the political prize. After all, workers constitute a huge voting constituency. On that single day when elections are held workers will have the power in their hands to punish these dictators once and for all’.
And ‘punish’ them they did! For the first time in the history of this country the opposition has scooped an unprecedented total of 20 seats in parliament (17 for UDC and 3 for the BCP) with several marginal constituencies.. And as the results of the elections eloquently illustrate, it was pay-back time for the workers. Today the BDP regime is a minority regime elected by 320, 657 people, while the combined national vote of the UDC (207, 113) and the BCP (140, 998) is 348, 111 i.e. 27, 446 more than the national vote cast for the BDP.
Since 1999 the BDP is sustained in power by the split vote of the BCP. The BCP leadership has a mammoth decision to make; either to find ways of jumping onto the UDC bandwagon or face possible relegation to the great dustbin of history. The mass exodus from the BCP to the UDC has already started. Our call at the beginning of this year for a UDC-BCP electoral pact in an open letter to Dumelang Saleshando was ignored with disastrous consequences.
In the Global Post of November 11, 2014 it is regrettable that BCP activist Lotty Manyapetsa is reported as having said, ‘leaders of the BOFEPUSU should abstain from politics because that is bound to break the union as evidenced by the contradicting statements issued by the leaders of the same union’.. Such reactionary drivel is enough reason why the workers must shun the BCP. The BCP is the one which nearly divided BOFEPUSU by pulling out of the umbrella.
The first step to freedom in the labour movement is to abandon false political neutrality and consciously build strategic alliances with revolutionary parties while safeguarding their relative autonomy as trade unions. BOFEPUSU has just taken that giant step to emancipate themselves and the rest of the oppressed masses of Botswana. As far back as 1921 the third Congress of the Communist International addressed the question of trade unions and politics. They made the following observations;
The bourgeoisie keeps the working class enslaved not only by means of naked force, but also by subtle deception. In the hands of the bourgeoisie, the school, the church, parliament, art, literature, the daily press – all become powerful means of duping the working masses and spreading the ideas of the bourgeoisie into the proletarian milieu. One of the ideas which the ruling classes have succeeded in inculcating into the working masses is trade-union neutrality – the idea that trade unions are non-political organizations and should have no party affiliations.
The Communist International argued that the bourgeoisie cannot openly call on the workers’ trade unions to support the bourgeois parties, so it urges the unions not to support any party. The sole aim of the bourgeoisie, however, is to prevent the trade unions from supporting progressive parties or political formations like the UDC. Trade union neutrality amounts to tacit support for the capitalist status quo and denies workers the opportunity to forge strategic partnerships with like-minded revolutionary political parties and movements.
Since 1966 the BDP has been propped up employers, including De Beers while it lulled the workers into a false of political neutrality. The irony of it all is that the millions that De Beers, Dada and Derrick Brink contribute to the BDP political campaign is the sum total of the workers’ unpaid surplus value which accumulates in the hands of the capitalist employers by virtue of the fact that they privately own and control the means of subsistence – land, cattle, diamonds, automobile industries etc.
The fruits of the workers’ sweat are effectively used against them by financing a political party which is ideologically hostile to the interests of the workers. Even the blankets and radios used to buy votes are made by workers of other countries but are now used to oppress the workers of Botswana. So it is only proper and fitting that workers identify with a party or political movement such the UDC that addresses some of their concerns.
The Oil and Gas industry has undergone several significant developments and changes over the last few years. Understanding these developments and trends is crucial towards better appreciating how to navigate the engagement in this space, whether directly in the energy space or in associated value chain roles such as financing.
Here, we explore some of the most notable global events and trends and the potential impact or bearing they have on the local and global market.
Governments and companies around the world have been increasingly focused onÂ transitioning towards renewable energy sourcesÂ such as solar and wind power. This shift is motivated by concerns about climate change and the need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. Africa, including Botswana, is part of these discussions, as we work to collectively ensure a greener and more sustainable future. Indeed, this is now a greater priority the world over. It aligns closely with the increase in Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) investing being observed. ESG investing has become increasingly popular, and many investors are now looking for companies that are focused on sustainability and reducing their carbon footprint. This trend could have significant implications for the oil and fuel industry, which is often viewed as environmentally unsustainable. Relatedly and equally key are the evolving government policies. Government policies and regulations related to the Oil and Gas industry are likely to continue evolving with discussions including incentives for renewable energy and potentially imposing stricter regulations on emissions.
The COVID-19 pandemic has also played a strong role. Over the last two years, the pandemic had a profound impact on the Oil and Gas industry (and fuel generally), leading to a significant drop in demand as travel and economic activity slowed down. As a result, oil prices plummeted, with crude oil prices briefly turning negative in April 2020. Most economies have now vaccinated their populations and are in recovery mode, and with the recovery of the economies, there has been recovery of oil prices; however, the pace and sustainability of recovery continues to be dependent on factors such as emergence of new variants of the virus.
This period, which saw increased digital transformation on the whole, also saw accelerated and increased investment in technology. The Oil and Gas industry is expected to continue investing in new digital technologies to increase efficiency and reduce costs. This also means a necessary understanding and subsequent action to address the impacts from the rise of electric vehicles. The growing popularity of electric vehicles is expected to reduce demand for traditional gasoline-powered cars. This has, in turn, had an impact on the demand for oil.
Last but not least, geopolitical tensions have played a tremendous role. Geopolitical tensions between major oil-producing countries can and has impacted the supply of oil and fuel. Ongoing tensions in the Middle East and between the US and Russia could have an impact on global oil prices further, and we must be mindful of this.
On the home front in Botswana, all these discussions are relevant and the subject of discussion in many corporate and even public sector boardrooms. Stanbic Bank Botswana continues to take a lead in supporting the Oil and Gas industry in its current state and as it evolves and navigates these dynamics. This is through providing financing to support Oil and Gas companiesâ operations, including investments in new technologies. The Bank offers risk management services to help oil and gas companies to manage risks associated with price fluctuations, supply chain disruptions and regulatory changes. This includes offering hedging products and providing advice on risk management strategies.
Advisory and support for sustainability initiatives that the industry undertakes is also key to ensuring that, as companies navigate complex market conditions, they are more empowered to make informed business decisions. It is important to work with Oil and Gas companies to develop and implement sustainability strategies, such as reducing emissions and increasing the use of renewable energy. This is key to how partners such as Stanbic Bank work to support the sector.
Last but not least, Stanbic Bank stands firmly in support of Botswanaâs drive in the development of the sector with the view to attain better fuel security and reduce dependence risk on imported fuel. This is crucial towards ensuring a stronger, stabler market, and a core aspect to how we can play a role in helping drive Botswanaâs growth. Â Continued understanding, learning, and sustainable action are what will help ensure the Oil and Gas sector is supported towards positive, sustainable and impactful growth in a manner that brings social, environmental and economic benefit.
Loago Tshomane is Manager, Client Coverage, Corporate and Investment BankingÂ (CIB), Stanbic Bank Botswana
So, the conclusion is brands are important. I start by concluding because one hopes this is a foregone conclusion given the furore that erupts over a botched brand. If a fast food chef bungles a food order, thereâd be possibly some isolated complaint thrown. However, if the same companyâs marketing expert or agency cooks up a tasteless brand there is a country-wide outcry. Why?Â Perhaps this is because brands affect us more deeply than we care to understand or admit. The fact that the uproar might be equal parts of schadenfreude, black twitter-esque criticism and, disappointment does not take away from the decibel of concern raised.
A good place to start our understanding of a brand is naturally by defining what a brand is. Marty Neumier, the genius who authored The Brand Gap, offers this instructive definition – âA brand is a personâs gut feel about a product or serviceâ. In other words, a brand is not what the company says it is. It is what the people feel it is. It is the sum total of what it means to them. Brands are perceptions. So, brands are defined by individuals not companies. But brands are owned by companies not individuals. Brands are crafted in privacy but consumed publicly. Brands are communal. Granted, you say. But that doesnât still explain why everybody and their pet dog feel entitled to jump in feet first into a brand slug-fest armed with a hot opinion. True. But consider the following truism.
Brands are living. They act as milestones in our past. They are signposts of our identity. Beacons of our triumphs. Indexes of our consumption. Most importantly, they have invaded our very words and world view. Try going for just 24 hours without mentioning a single brand name. Quite difficult, right? Because they live among us they have become one of us. And we have therefore built âbrand bondsâ with them. For example, iPhone owners gather here. You love your iPhone. It goes everywhere. You turn to it in moments of joy and when we need a quick mood boost. Notice how that ârelationshipâ started with desire as you longingly gazed upon it in a glossy brochure. That quickly progressed to asking other people what they thought about it. Followed by the zero moment of truth were you committed and voted your approval through a purchase. Does that sound like a romantic relationship timeline. You bet it does. Because it is. When we conduct brand workshops we run the Brand Loyalty â˘ exercise wherein we test peopleâs loyalty to their favourite brand(s). The results are always quite intriguing. Most people are willing to pay a 40% premium over the standard price for âtheirâ brand. They simply wonât easily âbreakupâ with it. Doing so can cause brand âheart acheâ. There is strong brand elasticity for loved brands.
Now that we know brands are communal and endeared, then companies armed with this knowledge, must exercise caution and practise reverence when approaching the subject of rebranding. Itâs fragile. The question marketers ought to ask themselves before gleefully jumping into the hot rebranding cauldron is â Do we go for an Evolution (partial rebrand) or a Revolution(full rebrand)? An evolution is incremental. It introduces small but significant changes or additions to the existing visual brand. Here, think of the subtle changes youâve seen in financial or FMCG brands over the decades. Evolution allows you to redirect the brand without alienating its horde of faithful followers. As humans we love the familiar and certain. Change scares us. Especially if weâve not been privy to the important but probably blinkered âstrategy sessionsâ ongoing behind the scenes. Revolutions are often messy. They are often hard reset about-turns aiming for a total new look and âfeelâ.
Hard rebranding is risky business. History is littered with the agony of brands large and small who felt the heat of public disfavour. In January 2009, PepsiCo rebranded the Tropicana. When the newly designed package hit the shelves, consumers were not having it. The New York Times reports that âsome of the commenting described the new packaging as âuglyâ âstupidâ. They wanted their old one back that showed a ripe orange with a straw in it. Sales dipped 20%. PepsiCo reverted to the old logo and packaging within a month. In 2006 Mastercard had to backtrack away from itâs new logo after public criticism, as did Leeds United, and the clothing brand Gap. AdAge magazine reports that critics most common sentiment about the Gap logo was that it looked like something a child had created using a clip-art gallery. Botswana is no different. University of Botswana had to retreat into the comfort of the known and accepted heritage strong brand.Â Sir Ketumile Masire Teaching Hospital was badgered with complaints till it âadjustedâ its logo.
So if the landscape of rebranding is so treacherous then whey take the risk? Companies need to soberly assess they need for a rebrand. According to the fellows at Ignyte Branding a rebrand is ignited by the following admissions :
Our brand name no longer reflects our companyâs vision.
Weâre embarrassed to hand out our business cards.
Our competitive advantage is vague or poorly articulated.
Our brand has lost focus and become too complex to understand. Our business model or strategy has changed.
Our business has outgrown its current brand.
Weâre undergoing or recently underwent a merger or acquisition. Our business has moved or expanded its geographic reach.
We need to disassociate our brand from a negative image.
Weâre struggling to raise our prices and increase our profit margins. We want to expand our influence and connect to new audiences. Weâre not attracting top talent for the positions we need to fill. All the above are good reasons to rebrand.
The downside to this debacle is that companies genuinely needing to rebrand might be hesitant or delay it altogether. The silver lining I guess is that marketing often mocked for its charlatans, is briefly transformed from being the Archilles heel into Thanosâ glove in an instant.
So what does a company need to do to safely navigate the rebranding terrain? Companies need to interrogate their brand purpose thoroughly. Not what they think they stand for but what they authentically represent when seen through the lens of their team members. In our Brand Workshop we use a number of tools to tease out the compelling brand truth. This section always draws amusing insights. Unfailingly, the top management (CEO & CFO)always has a vastly different picture of their brand to the rest of their ExCo and middle management, as do they to the customer-facing officer. We have only come across one company that had good internal alignment. Needless to say that brand is doing superbly well.
There is need a for brand strategies to guide the brand. One observes that most brands âmake a planâ as they go along. Little or no deliberate position on Brand audit, Customer research, Brand positioning and purpose, Architecture, Messaging, Naming, Tagline, Brand Training and may more. A brand strategyÂ distils why your business exists beyond making money â its âwhyâ. It defines what makes your brand what it is, what differentiates it from the competition and how you want your customers to perceive it. Lacking a brand strategy disadvantages the company in that it appears soul-less and lacking in personality. Naturally, people do not like to hang around humans with nothing to say. A brand strategy understands the value proposition. People donât buy nails for the nails sake. They buy nails to hammer into the wall to hang pictures of their loved ones. People donât buy make up because of its several hues and shades. Make up is self-expression. Understanding this arms a brand with an iron clad clad strategy on the brand battlefield.
But perhaps youâve done the important research and strategy work. Itâs still possible to bungle the final look and feel.Â A few years ago one large brand had an extensive strategy done. Hopes were high for a top tier brand reveal. The eventual proposed brand was lack-lustre. I distinctly remember, being tasked as local agency to âlandâ the brand and we outright refused. We could see this was a disaster of epic proportions begging to happen. The brand consultants were summoned to revise the logo. After a several tweaks and compromises the brand landed. It currently exists as one of the countryâs largest brands. Getting the logo and visual look right is important. But how does one know if they are on the right path? Using the simile of a brand being a person – The answer is how do you know your outfit is right? It must serve a function, be the right fit and cut, it must be coordinated and lastly it must say something about you. So it is possible to bath in a luxurious bath gel, apply exotic lotion, be facebeat and still somehow wear a faux pas outfit. Avoid that.
Another suggestion is to do the obvious. Pre-test the logo and its look and feel on a cross section of your existing and prospective audience. There are tools to do this. Their feedback can save you money, time and pain. Additionally one must do another obvious check â use Google Image to verify the visual outcome and plain Google search to verify the name. These are so obvious they are hopefully for gone conclusions. But for the brands that have gone ahead without them, I hope you have not concluded your brand journeys as there is a world of opportunity waiting to be unlocked with the right brand strategy key.
Cliff Mada is Head of ArmourGetOn Brand Consultancy, based in Gaborone and Cape Town.
The Ibrahim Index of African Governance (IIAG) is the most comprehensive dataset measuring African governance performance through a wide range of 81 indicators under the categories of Security & Rule of law, Participation, Rights & Inclusion, Foundations of Economic Opportunity, and Human Development. It employs scores, expressed out of 100, which quantify a countryâs performance for each governance measure and ranks, out of 54, in relation to the 54 African countries.
The 2022 IIAG Overall Governance score is 68.1 and ranks Botswana at number 5 in Africa. In 2019 Botswana was ranked 2nd with an overall score of 73.3. That is a sharp decline. The best-performing countries are Mauritius, Seychelles, Tunisia, and Cabo Verde, in that order. A glance at the categories shows that Botswana is in third place in Africa on the Security and Rule of law; ninth in the Participation, Rights & Inclusion Category â indicating a shrinking participatory environment; eighth for Foundations of Economic Opportunity category; and fifth in the Human Development category.
The 2022 IIAG comes to a sweeping conclusion: Governments are less accountable and transparent in 2021 than at any time over the last ten years; Higher GDP does not necessarily indicate better governance; rule of law has weakened in the last five years; Democratic backsliding in Africa has accelerated since 2018; Major restrictions on freedom of association and assembly since 2012. Botswana is no exception to these conclusions. In fact, a look at the 10-year trend shows a major challenge. While Botswana remains in the top 5 of the best-performing countries in Africa, there are signs of decline, especially in the categories of Human Development and Security & Rule of law.
I start with this picture to show that Botswana is no longer the poster child for democracy, good governance, and commitment to the rule of law that it once was. In fact, to use the term used in the IIAG, Botswana is experiencing a âdemocratic backsliding.â
The 2021 Transparency International Corruption Perception Index (CPI) had Botswana at 55/ 100, the lowest ever score recorded by Botswana dethroning Botswana as Africaâs least corrupt country to a distant third place, where it was in 2019 with a CPI of 61/100. (A score closer to zero denotes the worst corrupt and a score closer to 100 indicates the least corrupt country). The concern here is that while other African states are advancing in their transparency and accountability indexes, Botswana is backsliding.
The Transitional National Development Plan lists participatory democracy, the rule of law, transparency, and accountability, as key âdeliverables,â if you may call those deliverables. If indeed Botswana is committed to these principles, she must ratify the African Charter on Democracy Elections and Governance (ACDEG).
The African Charter on Democracy Elections and Governance is the African Union’s principal policy document for advancing democratic governance in African Union member states. The ACDEG embodies the continentâs commitment to a democratic agenda and set the standards upon which countries agreed to be held accountable. The Charter was adopted in 2007 and came into force a decade ago, in 2012.
Article 2 of the Charter details its objectives among others as to a) Promote adherence, by each State Party, to the universal values and principles of democracy and respect for human rights; b) Promote and protect the independence of the judiciary; c) Promote the establishment of the necessary conditions to foster citizen participation, transparency, access to information, freedom of the press and accountability in the management of public affairs; d) Promote gender balance and equality in the governance and development processes.
The Charter emphasizes certain principles through which member states must uphold: Citizen Participation, Accountable Institutions, Respect for Human Rights, Adherence to the principles of the Rule of Law, Respect for the supremacy of the constitution and constitutional order, Entrenchment of democratic Principles, Separation of Powers, Respect for the Judiciary, Independence and impartiality of electoral bodies, best practice in the management of elections. These are among the top issues that Batswana have been calling for, that they be entrenched in the new Constitution.
The ACDEG is a revolutionary document. Article 3 of the ACDEG, sets guidance on the principles that must guide the implementation of the Charter among them: Effective participation of citizens in democratic and development processes and in the governance of public affairs; Promotion of a system of government that is representative; Holding of regular, transparent, free and fair elections; Separation of powers; Promotion of gender equality in public and private institutions and others.
Batswana have been calling for laws that make it mandatory for citizen participation in public affairs, more so, such calls have been amplified in the just-ended âconsultative processâ into the review of the Constitution of Botswana. Many scholars, academics, and Batswana, in general, have consistently made calls for a constitution that provides for clear separation of powers to prevent concentration of power in one branch, in Botswanaâs case, the Executive, and provide for effective checks and balances. Other countries, like Kenya, have laws that promote gender equality in public and private institutions inscribed in their constitutions. The ACDEG could be a useful advocacy tool for the promotion of gender equality.
Perhaps more relevant to Botswanaâs situation now is Article 10 of the Charter. Given how the constitutional review process unfolded, the numerous procedural mistakes and omissions, the lack of genuine consultations, the Charter principles could have provided a direction, if Botswana was party to the Charter. âState Parties shall ensure that the process of amendment or revision oftheir constitution reposes on national consensus, obtained, if need be, through referendum,â reads part of Article 10, giving clear clarity, that the Constitution belong to the people.
With the African Charter on Democracy Elections and Governance in hand, ratified, and also given the many shortfalls in the current constitution, Batswana can have a tool in hand, not only to hold the government accountable but also a tool for measuring aspirations and shortfalls of our governance institutional framework.
Botswana has not signed, nor has it acceded or ratified the ACDEG. The time to ratify the ACDEG is now. Our Movement, Motheo O Mosha Society, with support from the Democracy Works Foundation and The Charter Project Africa, will run a campaign to promote, popularise and advocate for the ratification of the Charter (#RatifytheCharter Campaign). The initiative is co-founded by the European Union. The Campaign is implemented with the support of our sister organizations: Global Shapers Community â Gaborone Hub, #FamilyMeetingBW, Botswana Center for Public Integrity, Black Roots Organization, Economic Development Forum, Molao-Matters, WoTech Foundation, University of Botswana Political Science Society, Young Minds Africa and Branding Akosua.
Ratifying the Charter would reaffirm Botswanaâs commitment to upholding strong democratic values, and respect for constitutionalism, and promote the rule of law and political accountability. Join us in calling the Government of Botswana to #RatifyTheCharter.
*Morena MONGANJA is the Chairperson of Motheo O Mosha society; a grassroots movement advocating for a new Constitution for Botswana. Contact: email@example.com or WhatsApp 77 469 362.