Connect with us

Opinions

LGBTQ rights and inclusion amid Botswana’s constitutional review process

All Batswana must be included in debate

Published

on

Constitutional review interest group meeting in Kasane, Botswana. (Photo by Raymond Kolanyane)

The Botswana courts are among the very few in Southern Africa that has set a trajectory in realizing and protecting LGBTIQ+ rights. 

In 2016, the Botswana Court of Appeal, in the Lesbians, Gays and Bisexuals of Botswana (LEGABIBO) registration case, proclaimed that “members of the gay, lesbian and transgender community, although no doubt a small minority, and unacceptable to some on religious or other grounds, form part of the rich diversity of any nation and are fully entitled in Botswana, as in any other progressive state, to the constitutional protection of their dignity.” This remark would go on to set the tone for queer rights in Botswana and the region. 

The presidential promise of advancing together

Commencing the 2018 16 days of activism against violence on women and children campaign, President Mokgweetsi Masisi acknowledged LGBTIQ+ people as vulnerable a group who continue to face stigma and discrimination in Botswana. He went on to say that they need equal protection under the law. This an authentic statement because they do form part of the rich diverse nation of Botswana. In response, the members of the LGBTQI+ community through an open letter thanked him for his words and encouraged him to live up to his call for protection. In 2019 during his election campaign, the president of Botswana promised Batswana a fair and equal constitutional review process that reflects the voices and concerns of all Batswana — regardless of their social, economic and gender status. This coming at a time when his government was fighting for the recriminalization of LGBTIQ+. This appeal by the State was a push for the continuous exclusion of LGBTIQ+ and denying them their fundamental rights to freedom of expression, liberty, privacy, dignity and protection under law. In its sense, being LGBTIQ+ is a political statement and to fully enjoy the privileges that come with the bill of rights as stipulated in the constitution one needs the backing and pledge of allegiance from the government. 

A constitutional review – a space for all?

In January 2022, President Masisi had promised that the constitutional review process would be inclusive of LGBTIQ+ people. This had given hope and a form of relevance and belonging to the LGBTIQ+ community that finally we were being seen by the highest office in the land.  This presidential promise had encouraged LGBTIQ+ people to practice their fundamental civic duty and contributing to a better and inclusive nation. The constitutional review process commenced at the anticipation of Batswana, but more anticipated was the LGBTIQ+ community. Would this process be inclusive, and progressive and reflect the diversity of Batswana as promised by the president bearing in mind his consistency and failure to live up to his words or were the LGBTIQ+ community once again a pawn in the political game? A December 2022 Afrobarometer report showed that an increasing number Batswana are losing trust in the president’s office. This is followed by the recent controversial reports around the president interfering with the judicial system in the just concluded Bamalete land case. One tends to wonder the legitimacy and question the transparency of the mandate of the Office of the President in ensuring that all Batswana are included and have a fair access to social, economic and legislative practices. In our fight for the realization and promotion of human rights for all, to become true leaders and masters of diversity and inclusion, we must be deliberate and intentional about practicing inclusion from all dimensions.

The bare minimum and reflection of diversity

President Masisi had appointed the Presidential Commission of Inquiry to review Botswana’s Constitution and spearhead this process. In country of 2.4 million people representation matters. The commission of inquiry to tick the gender box have eight females form part of the 19 tasked force team. The rather disappointment that when diversity and representation is addressed, it is only limited to cisgendered male and female. It does not consider the broader gender and sexuality spectrum. Such an essential democratic and civic process needs representation of already marginalized groups, such as young women, people living with disabilities and LGBTIQ+ people. After all, the High Court did state that they [the LGBTIQ+ community] form part of the rich diversity of Botswana. The president, after his promise ensuring inclusion of LGBTIQ+ people in the constitutional review process, made an intentional decision to exclude LGBTIQ+ persons in the commission of enquiry. The Presidential Commission of Inquiry task force had experts from the public workers union, House of Chiefs, Village Development Committee, public health education sector, religious community, advocates for people with disabilities and the attorney general’s office. The setup of the commission contributes to multiple forms of exclusion of sexual and gender minorities; as country that recently decriminalized a group that had been marginalized and vulnerable for decades, the intentional representation of LGBTIQ+ people would have been present in the commission of inquiry.  

The ignorance of considering the law

In 2021, when the Botswana Court of Appeal decriminalized consensual same sex-sexual relations, this saw a landmark change and the continuous, infectious trajectory from the 2016 LEGABIBO registration case. This put another stamp of approval of legitimacy by the courts that human rights indeed are for all. The fundamental rights to expression, liberty, privacy and equal protection under the law are to be enjoyed by LGBTIQ+ people. This was now the law as pronounced by the courts. The process of constitutional review failed to live up the law — to protect and include LGBTIQ+ people. Society and its norms are dynamic and evolutionary and transform as a society and the world change. LGBTIQ+ people mobilized one another and collectively entered a setting that from the onset aimed to exclude them. The constitutional review process setting included the Kgotla setting, which for many queer people and women is already an unwelcoming place filled with patriarchal dominance. Galvanized with religious and traditional fundamentalist the Kgotla platform seemed like a deliberate intention to continue excluding women and queer people. In 2021, women who wore pants were turned away from receiving the COVID-19 vaccinations at the Kgotla spaces. Queer resilience is a powerful thing as this did not discourage LGBTIQ+ people from exercising their democratic rights. LGBTIQ+ showed up and showed cause. If there is one thing to learn from a community who for years have been criminalized and ostracized is that we continue to have hope and that the struggle for true freedom and liberty continues. A luta continua!

The presidential commission of LGBTIQ+ erasure

The commission of inquiry submitted its final report with recommendations to the president for consideration. The report was also made available to the public to engage with. The voices captured and recommendations made caused an outcry from the public, civil society organizations and human rights movements. The report displayed the continuation erasure LGBTIQ+ people and goes against the orders of the courts which are now laws and the utterances of President Masisi. The commission needed to investigate best practices and incorporate these into the recommendations to the president for review. It needed to have identified and differentiated constitutional matters from civic and social matters. The recommendations took little to no human rights-based approach resulting in multiple discriminatory and harmful recommendations that impact various vulnerable and marginalised groups in Botswana. The report was unsafe and lacked inclusive and protective language, this in addition to it already being anti-gender and anti-LGBTIQ+. This goes against the principles and ethics of human rights, body autonomy and doing-no-harm.  

Bradley Fortuin is the LGBTIQ+ Program Officer at the Southern Africa Litigation Center and is social justice activist with over 10 years of experience in program design and strategic management, focusing on developing, implementing, and strengthening LGBTIQ+-led movements. 

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

Opinions

Do not forget that Renee Good was queer

Far-right media link shooting victim’s sexuality to her protest of ICE

Published

on

(Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

Please do not forget that Renee Nicole Good was a queer woman. 

Last week, Good, a 37-year-old American citizen, was shot and killed by a United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent in Minneapolis. Her wife Rebecca Good was present when the ICE agent shot her, standing outside their car. In the immediate aftermath, Minneapolis erupted with protests aimed at ICE in the city and Republican officials, including President Donald Trump and Vice President JD Vance, who argued the shooting was justified as an act of self-defense. 

In a press conference held this past Thursday, Vance told reporters that Good was “a victim of left-wing ideology.” “I can believe that her death is a tragedy,” Vance said,” while also recognizing that it is a tragedy of her own making.” Many criticized Vance’s statement, especially given how he blamed “left-wing extremism” for Charlie Kirk’s death in September on a Utah campus and Vance himself doubled down on condemning those who were celebrating the far-right podcaster’s fatal shooting.

Department of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem implied that Good was a domestic terrorist while Fox News host Jesse Watters said that “the woman who lost her life was a self-proclaimed poet from Colorado with pronouns in her bio.” 

Laura Loomer, another far-right Trump supporter, tweeted, “‘She/her.’ Literally every time,” in response to what is believed to be Good’s Instagram account. Loomer and Watters both pointed out her pronouns are somehow part of the reason she was tied to ICE-related violence. 

As these comments from far right pundits show, far-right media coverage was quick to connect Good’s queerness to her work to inhibit ICE activity in Minneapolis. 

But while far-right news outlets highlighting Good’s queerness, centrist and even leftist news outlets also erased her wife’s experience, featuring interviews with Good’s mom and ex-husband but not her wife who was present for the shooting, feeding into the narrative that she was an “innocent” white mother while denying Good’s own agency in mobilizing for immigrants in her community. 

Nobody should be shot by government agencies ever, and these news outlets do not need to play into the construction of an “innocent” white woman for people to be outraged by her death. In fact, in doing so and denying Good’s queerness, they deny the way in which Good’s identity likely affected the way she interacted with the police. For queer and trans people, police are not safe people–in fact, Good’s last words deescalating the situation reflect the ways that homophobia and misogyny prime queer women, and all women to placate men’s emotions.

And it still didn’t work. After shooting her, the ICE agent called her a “fucking bitch,” in front of her wife who was kept away from Good while she bled out in her car.

When the media reinforces the narrative that she was an “innocent” mother, it reinforces the same sexism and racism that allows police brutality to continue. 

In an interview, author of the book After Purity released this past December, Sara Moslener said that “White womanhood has been constructed to require that white women sort of maintain purity within themselves as a way to maintain the purity within themselves as a way to maintain the purity of, the innocence of, the nation state. When the purity movement resurfaced in the 1990s, it was this recapitulation of the 19th century nation of sexual purity that was highly racialized.”

“It wasn’t something that was accessible to enslaved women, to other women of color, to immigrant women. It was this ideal of true womanhood that became connected to this idea of a strong nationstate. That rhetoric was then used to justify racial terror lynchings. If white women were threatened, you know, physically, bodily, culturally, they have the right to claim things. This was often used as a guise to justify violence and murder, especially against Black men. It even ties to the concept of Karen and the entitlement of white women, where they can weaponize their vulnerability,” Moslener said. 

Good’s shooting for many people was a breaking point for this very reason — because it represented the first time that they had witnessed a white person killed by an ICE agent or a member of the police. 

For some, their whiteness had been a source of safety because of the privilege of their skin color, or so they thought until Good’s murder this past week. In the aftermath, they are rethinking if this privilege will continue to protect them and what it can mean in a world where violence against white women’s bodies has long caused social backlash.

This is not a reason to stop fighting — Good was not the first person killed by ICE, not even the first person killed by ICE in 2026, but her whiteness is one of the central reasons that it incited outrage — because of a society that privileges and protects white women’s bodies. To describe Good as solely an “innocent” white woman, to deny her queerness, is to play into this performance of outrage about the brutalization of white women’s bodies.

If discussions of Good’s queerness — and persistent queerphobia against queer women — is not considered in our outrage, in our protests, we feed right into the same narratives that mean some police brutality, especially that against queer and trans people and people of color, goes completely unreported and unchallenged. 

This is state-sanctioned violence, and in the immediate aftermath of Good’s death, the Trump administration has demanded that people deny the evidence of their eyes and ears, has pushed the narrative that Good weaponized her vehicle against an ICE agent and that agent fatally shooting her was an act of self defense. This is categorically false but denying what we know to be true, what we can witness ourselves and understand, is the final step in fascism armed and funded by the government. 

But let’s be frank: This is not the first time that the American police or a government agent has murdered an unarmed person. Just under six years ago, George Floyd was murdered by police officers in the same city — his death was a breaking point for many who had witnessed police brutality against people of color. 

While people are eager to say Good’s name, we cannot say or remember her without remembering and saying the names of Black and Brown men and women, especially disabled people of color, who have been murdered in the hundreds by the police. Their names are often said, their murders often go unquestioned. 

People have been and will continue to say Good’s name largely because she was a white woman but the names of Black and Brown people go unsaid and unrecognized because of a system that performs outrage about violence against white bodies. What Good’s murder realized was how a system built on the protection of white women — a Christian nationalism committed to Social Purity — will still sacrifice white women who refuse to fall in line. 

Six federal prosecutors in Minnesota resigned this week over the Justice Department’s push to investigate Good’s widow. Among them was Joseph Thompson, a career federal prosecutor, who objected to investigating Good’s wife as well as the department’s refusal to investigate whether the shooting was lawful. 

In the signs, in the protests, in the prayers and pleas that you say and make in the aftermath of Good’s murder, do not deny her queerness, do not deny who she was and do not deny the work she did because in performing outrage against the murder of an “innocent” white mother we replicate the same systems of harm that hurt us all. 


Emma Cieslik is a museum worker and public historian.

Continue Reading

Letter-to-the-Editor

D.C. electoral bumper car season is in full swing

More than a dozen candidates running for incumbent Eleanor Holmes Norton’s seat

Published

on

Del. Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-D.C.) (Washington Blade photo by Michael Key)

The District of Columbia has entered into a challenging time not seen since Dr. Martin Luther King was murdered, the city burned and rioted and risked home rule being taken away. While statehood has twice passed the U.S. House of Representatives, the dream of being the 51st star on the American flag stagnates, to say the least. 

Currently according to Politics 1.com, there are already 14 Democrats including two sitting members of the City Council (At-Large Robert White and Ward 2’s Brooke Pinto)  and one Republican who have declared their candidacy to become the new voice in Congress. Unfortunately Congresswoman Eleanor Holmes Norton has refused to either announce her intentions to run for re-election again or gracefully acknowledge her time is over and she is ready to hand over the reins to continue the battles inflicted upon our home city. Congressional representation by press releases has simply got to stop as soon as possible!

Rank choice voting is going to be implemented in this 2026 cycle despite efforts to overturn or delay its implementation. Regardless of your thoughts on the new system, this will be one very interesting contest year to say the least. Rank choice … ready or not … here it comes!

Needless to say, the race for the Congressional seat is not the only major contest. Let us not forget the other positions up for election: the mayor, the attorney general, the chairman of the City Council, several ward and at-large races for the council. Add all these up and you will be looking at more moves on the political chess board than seen in the first Harry Potter film with the same results too. (As an aside, while the District of Columbia has no elected senators, it should be pointed out that any elected House member AND the District mayor have Senate floor privileges when in session.)

Before the June primary, it would be wise to make sure your voting registration is still current at the D.C. Board of Elections. Also, please urge friends not registered to do so as soon as possible. May we have the strength and will power to take back our city and stand up to those who want to destroy it.

Continue Reading

Opinions

Zach Wahls stood up for us, now let’s stand with him

Young Iowa Democrat running for U.S. Senate

Published

on

Iowa state Sen. Zach Wahls (Photo courtesy of Wahls for Iowa)

It was 15 years ago, on Jan. 30, 2011, that a college student, Zach Wahls, bravely stood in front of the Iowa Legislature, and spoke out, defending the marriage rights of his two moms. On Jan. 28 we will celebrate the 15th anniversary of that speech. That was the first time I, and millions of others, heard of Zach Wahls. I know Zach had no idea that speech would propel him to national prominence. It went viral, and Zach was invited to appear on the Ellen DeGeneres show, among other appearances. 

At the time, he was an engineering student at the University of Iowa. As he has said, when he prepared his notes over the weekend for his Monday speech to the legislature, he had no idea where this would lead him. Today, so many of us, not just his moms, have the chance to repay him for what he did that day, when he defended all our rights in Iowa. In the past 15 years, Zach has never stopped standing up for the rights of his moms, and for all of us in the LGBTQ community. 

I first met Zach at an event in Washington, D.C., when he was leading the fight to allow gay men to be leaders in the Boy Scouts of America. Having been a Boy Scout myself, and an Explorer adviser, and having promoted scouting for the handicapped (the term we used back in those days) this was an important fight for me. I was both honored to meet Zach, and have the chance to join him in that fight. Since then, I have followed his career. First as he went to Princeton for his graduate degree, and then back to Iowa, he is a sixth generation Iowan, to run for, and win, a seat in the Iowa State Senate. He was then elected to the post of minority leader. Today, Zach is running to become the United States Senator from Iowa. Zach is a member of the younger generation so many of us want to see serving in Congress. 

As soon as I heard Zach was running, I endorsed him. Many of you may have read my endorsement column in the Blade. He was recently in Washington, D.C. for a fundraiser held at the Women’s National Democratic Club, where I had the pleasure of meeting his wife, and his absolutely adorable son. I kidded him he should never go campaigning without them. Now, it’s important to remember, he is running in Iowa. Not an easy race to win. He has a primary to win, which I firmly believe he will, and then his likely opponent is the ultra MAGA Republican Congresswoman Ashley Hinson (R-Iowa). A poll done just before Sen. Joni Ernst (R-Iowa) said she would not run again, had Zach leading her. That may have been part of the reason she dropped out. If you followed Zach’s career in Iowa, you understand why Iowans would vote for him. If you haven’t, take a look at his website, to get an idea of where Zach stands on the issues, and the things he has been doing to fight for all Iowans. His proposed federal legislation, Keep the Promise Act, would strengthen Social Security. Zach understands we need to defeat the fascists working with the felon in the White House, before they totally destroy our country. He understands we need to fight for affordable healthcare for all, for his constituents in rural Iowa, who are getting hit the hardest by the felon’s policies. Iowa farmers are losing their farms because of the felon’s policies. While continuing to fight for the LGBTQ community, Zach has always understood, we are part of the broader community he is now fighting for. 

I hope those of you who read this column, will join with me, support Zach, and be part of the Zoom call on Wednesday, Jan. 28, to celebrate the 15th anniversary of Zach’s speech to the Iowa Legislature. To join, click on this link, and sign up. I also ask you to share this link with everyone you know. Our community owes something to Zach, but everyone will benefit, if Zach Wahls ends up in the United States Senate. He will make us all proud. 


Peter Rosenstein is a longtime LGBTQ rights and Democratic Party activist.

Continue Reading

Popular