KalahariLog

A couple of Botswana news stories caught my attention this weekend. Unfortunately, both of them put the country in negative light. The good news is, the papers still feel safe writing about it... The first story talks about worries over the Mugaberisation of the Botswana presidency, following proposed constitutional amendments that would give more power to the president.

The second story is about restricting travel for several activists from the West who have caused some trouble for the government in the past, for example, by keeping the Bushmen issues current. Here's how the Minister of Labor and Home Affairs explains the new requirement that 17 people must obtain visas before coming to Botswana (when no visas are required for anyone from a developed country):

"This is a routine thing.  It's something we do from time to time, if there are people we need to know when they visit Botswana. Yes, we want to know when they visit Botswana so that we can give them any assistance they may need"

OK, so these 17 people include several activists from Survival International, a few journalists (including a BBC correspondent) and an Australian Professor who wrote a paper entitled "Presidential Succession in Botswana: No model for Africa" who was reportedly deported from the country after an unsuccessful attempt to present the paper. While I understand why the government would like to restrict access for these people, pretending that this is for their convenience puts in a different category altogether.

I said that the papers still feel safe writing about issues like this but then I just saw yet another article which casts doubt even on this. The self-explanatory title "MPs slam media for sensational reporting" says it all.