header
top curve
bullet
Home
bullet
About Us
bullet
Support & Volunteering
bullet
Botswana context
bullet
Human rights days
bullet
Human rights issues
bullet
Events & Film Festivals
bullet
Press releases
bullet
Publications
bullet
FAQ
bullet
Links
bullet
Contact Us
   

ETHNIC MINORITIES AND INDIGENOUS PEOPLES

Background
Inequality in “equal” treatment
DITSHWANELO’s call for “substantive equality”
The Constitutional (Amendment) Act 2005
Basarwa (San) – the first people of Botswana
Violations of Basarwa (San) Rights
History of the Basarwa (San) loss of land
History of residence in the CKGR and lead up to the CKGR Case
The Case of the Relocation from the CKGR
DITSHWANELO’s work regarding ethnic minorities & indigenous peoples

Background

Botswana comprises approximately 34 different ethnic groups, as defined by Eight of these are considered to be the principle groups in Botswana:

These eight tribal groups have dominated all politics in Botswana since Independence, at national and local level. 

Much of this domination and discrimination is built into Botswana’s laws, especially the Chieftainship Act, the Tribal Lands Act, the Constitution and House of Chiefs, Botswana National Settlement Policy.    The domination and discrimination is also built into the language of Botswana, with many groups in society at a disadvantage because they can not learn in their mother tongue.  When children are denied an education in their mother tongue, not only are they disadvantaged in terms of their learning, but their ethnic identity is eroded.   

There are few statistics on ethnicity in Botswana because, as detailed in Inequality in equal treatment, the Government has sought to define all the people of Botswana as Batswana and therefore not collected ethnicity information in census data. 

Inequality in “equal” treatment

Since Independence in 1966, the Government of Botswana has considered all Batswana [the people of Botswana] to be “indigenous”, claiming that “Botswana is inhabited by many different ethnic groups that occupied the geographical areas of present-day Botswana at different times in history.”

The Government has endeavoured to build a united and peaceful nation based on equality of all citizens, with all ethnic groups and tribes being on an equal footing. This is ‘formal equality’, based on seeing everyone in the same form or image.  The Government does not believe in the separate but equal maxim; as demonstrated by the words of the Presidential Spokesperson, Sidney Pilane: “separate is not, and can never be considered equal” (in Dixon, R., “San fighting to keep their Kalahari hunting grounds”, Sunday Independent, 16 January 2005, p16).

However, treating people equally does not make people equal in terms of results.  The policy has effectively pushed all non-Tswana groups towards assimilation into the dominant Tswana culture.  The national language became Setswana and Tswana customary law was extended to all ethnic groups, in addition the citizens of Botswana as a whole became known as Batswana, regardless of their ethnic background.

By contrast, DITSHWANELO believes that policies should be based on ‘substantive equality’, an approach which focuses on ensuring people are equal in substance.  Once perspectives and a history of negative treatment of minority peoples put them at a distinct disadvantage, elimination of disadvantages often requires that these groups are given special status, with different or sometimes preferential treatment.

DITSHWANELO believes that the government’s consultation processes do not ensure genuine participation by communities.  Too often, the ‘consultation’ is effectively a process of telling community what the plans are.    In the internationally renowned case of the removal of the Basarwa / San from the Central Kalahari Game Reserve (CKGR), the process started with genuine consultation, but the process was not concluded. 

DITSHWANELO’s call for “substantive equality”

To achieve ‘substantive equality’, DITSHWANELO believes the following needs to be achieved / done in Botswana:

  • A thorough Constitutional review process to ensure equal legislative representation and protection for all ethnic groups, including amendment of The Tribal Land Act and the Chieftainship Act to ensure substantive equality for all.

  • Engagement with all ethnic minority communities to ensure that they have a say in their own development processes.

  • Government messages and in particular health and HIV/AIDS information to be translated into all Botswana languages.

  • Education programmes to be developed to incorporate all of Botswana’s ethnic diversity and the teaching of all Botswana languages.
  •   
  • Teaching about ethnic minorities in schools.

  • Addressing discrimination within particular sectors of society – police brutality, the BDF, possibly the allocation of land, wildlife officers, farmers, teachers/school somethings, employer.
    Something about involvement / benefits from in tourism development

The Constitutional (Amendment) Act 2005

In 1995, a Member of Parliament tabled a motion to request Government to amend Section 77, 78 and 79 of the Constitution to make them tribally neutral.    Parliament then established a Presidential Commission of Inquiry, known as the Balopi Commission, to determine whether these articles were indeed discriminatory, and if so, to make recommendations “to seek a construction that would eliminate any interpretation that renders the sections discriminatory; to review and propose the most effective method of selecting Members of the House of Chiefs and to propose and recommend measures to enhance the efficiency and effectiveness of the House of Chiefs”. 

Following the release of the Commission’s report, Parliament passed the Constitutional (Amendment) Act.  DITSHWANELO believes this Act only addresses the language of discrimination, without dealing with the underlying politics of discrimination inherent in the legislation.  Although it has been passed by parliament and assented to by the President, it has not yet commenced.  A commencement notice is required through a Statutory Instrument. Consequently, it is not clear what the current status is of S.14 (3) (c).   

Although the new Act uses the term ‘Ntlo ya Dikgosi’ which is a Setswana translation of ‘House of Chiefs’ to avoid all connotations that the term ‘Chief’ has in English, it is still based on the existing structure of inequality among Botswana’s tribes.  The number of seats will be increased from fifteen to thirty-three or thirty-five  , the eight ex-officio chiefs from the eight Tswana tribes will retain their favoured status, though under territorial, not ethnic titles.  Five members will be appointed by the President and will be accountable to him.  DITSHWANELO is concerned that these appointments equate to an increase in the power of the President and may lead to political appointments. The Chiefs who will fill the other twenty seats will be selected by twenty regional electoral colleges, which supporters hope will be more representative of the minority groups.

DITSHWANELO also believes that the Government has used the objective of making the Constitution ‘tribally neutral’ as an opportunity to remove the positive advantages which were allowed to the Basarwa and Bakgalagadi peoples who were permitted to remain in the Central Kalahari Game Reserve (CKGR).  The Act removes S.14(3)(c) which (i) imposes a limitation of the freedom of movement of all ‘who are not Bushmen’ for the ‘protection or well being of the Bushmen’ and (ii) provides this limitation for ‘defined areas of Botswana’.  In effect, only residents of the CKGR are permitted to enter the CKGR without permits. the removal of this section of the Constitution a political expedient, given the pending decision of the current court case relating to the Basarwa.

DITSHWANELO believes strongly that the Constitution is outdated in many ways and that it can not be addressed by minor changes here and there. It is not possible to say that the Constitution will become ‘tribally neutral’ by removing the reference to ‘Bushmen’.  The Constitution was drafted in 1965 and reflects a very different era.  A thorough Constitutional review is necessary to ensure a ‘rights-based’ approach to development.

Basarwa (San) – the first people of Botswana

Speakers of Khoisan languages in Botswana are collectively known as “Basarwa” in Botswana, or “San” across Southern Africa.  Botswana has an estimated population of about 60,000 Basarwa (approximately half the population of San people in Southern Africa and 3.5% of Botswana’s population).  They are spread across all parts of Botswana, particularly the Southern, Kweneng, Kgatleng, Ghanzi, Kgalagadi, Central and North West Districts.

The origin of the word, “Basarwa”, is believed to be “bao babasaruing dikgomo” (those who not rear cattle). The Basarwa have accepted this name reluctantly, because the implication is that the norm is to “rear animals” and so people who do not are defined in negative terms. 

The Basarwa or San have inhabited Southern Africa for at least 40,000 years.  As such, they may be categorised as “indigenous peoples” because they are said to be descendants of the original populations residing in the area now known as Botswana.

The traditional Basarwa or San peoples were nomadic hunters and gatherers, who travelled in small family bands. They followed the water, game and edible plants; carrying with them everything they needed for daily subsistence.  Over most of their history they were not constrained, as more recently, to the arid regions of Botswana.

The concept of private ownership of land did not exist in their culture, as it is understood in present day Botswana. Traditionally, every Basarwa group is familiar with the environment in a particular area and relocation to a new area, with a new habitat, can have an acute and adverse effect.

Effectively, this meant that independence in the 1960s was granted to the major Tswana groups.  Without the formal acknowledgment of the Basarwa peoples’ existence within the Kalahari, there was no opportunity for land use patterns in the Basarwa traditional areas to find “official recognition”.  When the Kalahari Desert was declared Crown land by the former colonial Government, the Basarwa and other major inhabitants became unlawful occupiers on their traditional lands.  The major implication of the declaration was the denial of land entitlements to specific groups and this contributed to the marginalisation still being experienced by the Basarwa today.

Violations of Basarwa (San) Rights

As detailed in History of the Basarwa (San) loss of land, as early as 1885 the Basarwa / San lost their traditional lands, with a consequent loss of their traditional hunter-gatherer lifestyle.

Seen as a potential threat to the privately owned farms in the Ghanzi District, the Basarwa / San were being alienated from the time their lands were taken at the end of the 19th century.  The resultant history of marginalisation and maltreatment has led to the position of the Basarwa / San today: widely discriminated against, both officially and socially, and the poorest of the poor. 

Organisations working with the Basarwa / San, such as the Kuru Family of Organisations , have documented many examples of discrimination and mistreatment; from being expected to stand for others on buses, to primary school children being deliberately removed from the influence of their parents by being forced to attend schools away from their village.  Like most ethnic minorities in Botswana, Basarwa / San children are not allowed to speak their language in school.  There are even still missionaries in the region who tell Basarwa / San people they are immoral and practice the work of the devil.

The Basarwa / San are not officially recognised as the indigenous people of Botswana and their traditional hunter-gatherer culture has been all but lost.  The result is a vicious cycle of inequality and racism, diminished self-esteem, exploitation, poverty, loss of land, cultural erosion and poor education. 

At the extreme, there are cases of hunger and malnutrition among the communities in the Western District of Botswana; and there are cases of torture of Basarwa/San people by farmer owners and by police.

History of the Basarwa (San) loss of land

Much of this section is a summary of Robert K. Hitchcock’s “Background notes on the Central Kalahari Game Reserve and Ghanzi land and resource issues”, found on.

The Basarwa / San believe that in 1885 the British Government failed to determine who else occupied the area and entered into an agreement with the Bantu people only.  What is now the Ghanzi District of Botswana was ceded to the British South Africa Company of Cecil John Rhodes and the British Protectorate Government allocated a group of Afrikaaner farmers 41 farms on the Ghanzi Ridge in 1899.  The town of Ghanzi developed subsequently as a service centre for the farms and began to attracted people from other areas of the country. 

The Basarwa / San and other people who lived where these farms were created either had to stay on as labourers or find other places to live: in Ghanzi, cattle posts in communal areas, or east in what later became the Central Kalahari Game Reserve (CKGR). 

During the Second World War there was considerable movement of Basarwa / San to other parts of the country.  By 1953, according to the Ghanzi District Commissioner, there were about 8,000 Basarwa / San remaining in Ghanzi District, some of whom were still nomadic.  There was a concern on the part of at least some Ghanzi farmers that there were too many Basarwa / San without visible means of support who potentially could pose problems for the settlers’ freehold farms and herds.  The Bechuanaland Protectorate Administration therefore set up a settlement scheme away from the farms to which Basarwa / San could move.  In this case the scheme was abandoned after two years.

In 1958, a Protectorate administrative officer, George Silberbauer, was appointed to carry out surveys and come up with recommendations for dealing with San issues.  Based on his studies from 1958 to 1966, the Central Kalahari Game Reserve (CKGR) was established with the twin goals of (1) protecting the people of the Central Kalahari and (2) protecting the habitats and the wildlife of the region.  At this time, about 3,000 people, the majority being Basarwa, were residing inside the area which became the CKGR.  The Central Kalahari, the second largest game reserve in Africa at 51,145 sq km (according to the Department of Wildlife and National Parks), was one of only a handful on the continent that allowed local people to continue to reside and earn their livelihoods within it, including foraging for natural resources, and, in some cases, arable agricultural and livestock production.

In the mid-1970s, by which time there were only about 4,500 Basarwa / San in the Ghanzi District, efforts were made to get the land rights of the Basarwa / San recognised and to get the District Councils to set aside blocks of land as communal service settlements, which were supposed to be large enough to sustain groups of people either as foragers or as food producers.  In the Ghanzi District such settlements were created, but were considerably smaller than intended and experienced a range of problems, including lack of adequate water supplies and destructive encroachment by other people’s livestock, due to not being allowed to erect fences.

History of residence in the CKGR and lead up to the CKGR Case

In the sixties the CKGR was created with a specific goal of enabling the Basarwa / San to maintain a traditional lifestyle.

However, following various reports and a fact-finding mission in 1985, the Government concluded that “a conflict of land use had developed between wildlife conservation and emerging human settlements inside the Game Reserve. The lifestyle of the residents of the Game Reserve had changed. They were no longer either able or willing to live by what had been considered their traditional means. They were instead using horses, dogs, traps, spears and guns for hunting. They also depended on boreholes, trucked water supplies and food rations supplied by Government. All of these lifestyle shifts were already having an adverse impact on the environment… [For example] in the area around Old Xade, it was found that wildlife and veld-foods had been virtually eliminated within a radius of 40 km (24.8 miles) or an area of some 5 000 sq km (1 930 square miles).” 

“The Government decided in 1986 that:
The boundaries and the status of the CKGR should be maintained as at present;
The social and economic development of old Xade and other settlements in the Reserve, should be frozen as they had no prospect of becoming economically viable;
Viable sites for economic and social development should be identified outside the reserve and the residents of the reserve should be encouraged, but not forced, to relocate to those sites; and
That the Ministry of Local Government and Lands should advise Government on the incentives required to encourage residents in the reserve to relocate.”

Over the following 12 years the Government consulted with the residents of the CKGR and “it was only in 1997 that the actual relocation started after 1,739 people relocated to the new settlements of K’goesakeni (New Xade) and Kaudwane, which the residents themselves freely selected based on, amongst others, the terrain and surrounding vegetation which are similar to that found inside the Game Reserve.”

In 1998 a group of interested parties formed a “Negotiating Team” to seek to negotiate with Government to develop a plan suitable to both the Basarwa / San communities within the CKGR and the Department for Wildlife and National Parks’ aims for the CKGR and Khutse Game Reserve.  The Negotiating Team included communities residing in the CKGR, the First Peoples of the Kalahari (FPK), the Working Group on Indigenous Minorities in Southern Africa (WIMSA), the KURU Development Trust (now the Kuru Family of Organisations) – which is a consortium of NGOs owned by Basarwa / San, the Botswana Council of Churches and DITSHWANELO, who was a non-voting member.

Negotiations with the Government continued from 1998 until 2001 and had almost succeeded in developing a ‘Management Plan’ for the CKGR and Khutse Game Reserves which would enable sustainable use of natural resources and wildlife inside the CKGR by the Basarwa communities.  During this period the Government consistently proclaimed that they would not force people to relocate out of the CKGR.

However, on 31 January 2002, the Government of Botswana ceased the provision of basic and essential services to all Basarwa and Bakgalagadi remaining in the CKGR (both Basarwa and Bakgalagadi have lived in the CKGR, although ‘Basarwa’ tends to be understood to include the Bakgalagadi).  Immediately after the Government cancelled the services, officials dismantled the existing service infrastructure, such as water tanks, and dumped the community’s water reserves into the ground.  Since January 2002 the residents have also been banned from hunting in the Reserve.

The Government website states: “In 2001, there were 689 people who resided in the CKGR according to the Census. Of this number only 17 people, who are members of two related families, did not agree to thereafter relocate and therefore continued to reside in the Game Reserve… the continued provision of services was uneconomical and unsustainable.”

The site details the compensation paid to those who chose to relocate and the services which it did continue to provide to those within the CKGR, such as boarding school facilities and transport to and from school for holidays. 

What the Government’s site does not detail is the lack of a viable lifestyle outside the CKGR for those who relocated, which led many individuals to seek to return to the CKGR – which they then found the government would not allow them to do.  They had a choice about relocation prior to 2001, but were not fully aware of what that choice would mean.  The Government also does not detail the methods by which residents were ‘encouraged’ to relocate 

The Government also does not mention that the First Peoples of the Kalahari (FPK) made an attempt in 2002 to supply the remaining residents with water, but the Government forbade the organisation from doing so. Officials even went as far as denying access to the reserve to Amogelang Segootsane, a Mokgalagadi man who attempted to bring water to his family after they refused to relocate.  In July 2002 DITSHWANELO did succeed, through consultation with the Government, to obtain a permit for him to provide water and food to his family members who remain in the CKGR.  This permit was revoked in September 2005 and, again, only re-instated in through DITSHWANELO’s advocacy on Mr Selootsane’s behalf.

Given the decision and manner of the decision by the Government to cease the supply of basic and essential services to the CKGR, the Negotiating Team was left with no choice but to take the matter to court for their immediate and necessary resumption.  See CKGR Case.

DITSHWANELO has consistently called for a return to the negotiation table, rather than the resort to the court.  The case has caused considerable international outcry, although not always based on verifiable facts.  DITSHWANELO does not believe, for example, that diamonds have been the cause of government decision making, as the Government of Botswana has the right to explore and mine diamonds in any part of the country and any diamonds found would belong to the State no matter who resided on the land – the CKGR is no different.

The Case of the Relocation from the CKGR

The case was brought before the High Court in 2002 and between then and 2004 was delayed by a series of technical matters.  The case returned to the High Court in 2004 and the trial is still ongoing. The issues under consideration in the present trial are:
1. Whether it was lawful for the Government to terminate basic and essential services to the     residents;
2. Whether the Government has the obligation to restore services to the residents;
3. Whether the residents were in possession of their land and were deprived of such possession     forcibly, wrongly, and without their consent; and
4. Whether the Government’s refusal to issue game licenses to the residents and its refusal to     allow them to enter the CKGR is unlawful and unconstitutional.

On 10 March 2006 the UN's Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD) noted its concern at “persistent allegations that [Bushmen] were forcibly removed, through, in particular, such measures as the termination of basic and essential services inside the Reserve, the dismantling of existing infrastructures, the confiscation of livestock, harassment and ill-treatment of some residents by police and wildlife officers, as well as the prohibition of hunting and restrictions on freedom of movement inside the Reserve.”  The UN committee urged the Botswana government to, “pay particular attention to the close cultural ties that bind the San/Basarwa [Bushmen] to their ancestral land; protect the economic activities of the San/Basarwa that are an essential element of their culture, such as hunting and gathering practices, whether conducted by traditional or modern means; study all possible alternatives to relocation; and seek the prior free and informed consent of the persons and groups concerned.”  The committee also condemned the government's removal of Bushman rights from the Botswana Constitution, which it says “may impact on the on-going court case brought by some residents of the Central Kalahari Game Reserve against the Government to challenge their relocation from the Reserve.”

The treatment of those remaining in the CKGR

As noted in the History of residence in the CKGR and lead up to the CKGR Case, a major concern expressed by DITSHWANELO and the Negotiating Team is the manner in which residents of the CKGR have been encouraged to relocate and the treatment of those Basarwa remaining in the CKGR.

In September 2005, following an outbreak of sarcoptic mange among some of the domestic stock of the residents, the CKGR residents – individuals who had relocated to villages outside the CKGR, but returned to the Reserve  – and the livestock of all residents were removed. The Department of Wildlife and National Parks issued a press release on 14 September 2005 stating:
“On order to prevent further disease transmission between domestic animals and wildlife and contamination of the wildlife gene pool by crossbreeding, those residents in the CKGR have been given notice to remove all their domestic animals from the Reserve in 14 days.  All the animals in the Reserve have been imported from Kaudwane, New Xade or Xere settlements.  Many of these animals (goats, sheep, horses and donkeys) were either part of the compensation packages for people relocated in 2002 or earlier or have been acquired with money received from compensation for relocating.  Any animals remaining after 14 days will be removed or destroyed.”

At the same time the Government decided that no one could take water to those who remained in the CKGR, meaning that the residents of the CKGR could only gather to sustain themselves – with no hunting allowed, no domestic animals and no access to outside water.

Conflict broke out during the implementation of this decision, with both Basarwa / San and Wildlife officials being hurt.  It remains unclear exactly what happened.  There were accusations that the police carried out forced removals at gunpoint, that police set fire to huts, and that Wildlife officials beat residents.  The Department of Wildlife and National Parks, however, was reported in the press as saying that “the residents of Molapo settlement in the CKGR requested that they be transported back to the village where they came from, New Xade. Government facilitated their transport – 34 people in total – to the village on the 7th and 8th of October 2005.”  Government officials have resorted to filming such incidents to avoid accusations and they stated that they have filmed and documented this incident and any accusations of mistreatment are false.

What is certainly clear is that tension between the residents and the Government of Botswana was considerably heightened in September-October 2005 

With DITSHWANELO’s assistance Amogelang Segootsane and his wife Gabosediwe Tshotlego, challenged the Government’s decision and won a High Court ruling that the Government had acted ‘unreasonably and unjustifiably’ and that Amogelang and Gabosediwe may:
i) enter, remain and exit the CKGR;
ii) bring water into the CKGR for their family use; and
iii) keep their goats inside the CKGR at their settlement (Gugamma).

However, the ruling also included the crucial proviso that the Government may still issue further orders if they are in the interests of good management of the CKGR. 

The decision is to be appealed by the State.

DITSHWANELO’s work regarding ethnic minorities & indigenous peoples

Providing support for ethnic minorities, and particularly the indigenous people of Botswana, is one of DITSHWANELO’s key focus areas of work.  Our work has included the following:

  • Our Outreach Programme in Kasane, which was established following repeated requests from support from Basarwa / San communities and NGOs.  The communities would often lack awareness of what they could do to protect and/or promote their basic human rights and how to seek redress violations of their rights.  They also lacked the confidence and knowledge of the best approach to negotiate with appropriate authorities and sought DITSHWANELO’s involvement as a facilitator.  Following an official request from Basarwa / San communities to help them understand and achieve their rights, we undertook a detailed assessment and established a Centre in Kasane.  Parts of Botswana such as Ghanzi already had NGOs dedicated to supporting the Basarwa / San, but this northern part of Botswana had no such support.


  • Support for the CKGR case and, when functioning, the Negotiating Team.  Our support for the case has become less direct since the involvement of non-Batswana influences.  We have consistently called for a return to the negotiating table, rather than the current legal conflict.


  • Conduct of seminars; This has included a Focus Seminar on Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerances, in April 2001, in preparation for the World Conference Against Racism; and a follow-up Seminar on Ethnicity and Tribalism in Botswana in October 2001.    DITSHWANELO held a seminar for minority ethnic groups in Botswana training them on the use of International and Regional Instruments and Systems. The seminar also focused on the provisions of the Constitution that are said to be discriminatory and which are said to be promoting tribalism and explored possible solutions based on International and Regional instruments.


  • Issuance of a large number of press releases since 1993, intended to raise awareness of the plight of the Basarwa / San and to advocate for specific outcomes – such as negotiation over the CKGR situation.


  • Issuance of press releases regarding other issues related to ethnic minorities.

Indigenous Peoples/The Basarwa (San)

DITSHWANELO has received further recognition for its ability to provide objective and efficacious mediation services. This position of trust was reaffirmed through a mandate to represent several NGOs at inter-ministerial committee meetings concerned with the relocation of the Basarwa people from the Central Kgalagadi Game Reserve (CKGR) in the Western Region in 1997 and 1998.

Land rights have become an increasingly important issue for the Basarwa (San) and the Centre's experiences have shown that Basarwa communities nation wide share similar human rights concerns such as unemployment, torture, poverty and dispossession. Directly linked to this position was DITSHWANELO'S investigation into the forced removal of a Basarwa community of approximately 400 people in Ngamiland, in northwestern Botswana in 1998. DITSHWANELO is a non-voting member in the negotiation team (NT) that is made up of San who are claiming their right to live in the Central Kgalagadi Game Reserve (CKGR).

Although there are approximately 50.000 Basarwa/San in Botswana, isolation from each other, has further deprived the communities from effective lobbying for their rights.

DITSHWANELO has successfully resolved conflicts between arable and commercial farmers without having to fight legal battles in courts but through encouraging dialogue with all parties involved. In these successful cases unfairly relocated Basarwa have regained their rights to their arable fields and have been relocated to their place of origin while the cattle farmer with whom they had the conflicts also retained his grazing rights in the neighbourhood.

The DITSHWANELO Field Office in Kasane will further expand its activities and values the mediation approach as one of the invaluable tools in its endeavour to promote and defend the rights of the Basarwa and will employ it more often in the coming years.

Related Pages

Minority Rights
Alternative Reports to the Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (CERD)

Press Releases


15 February 2006

Press Release Following a Workshop on Rights of Minority Groups

25 November 2005

Press Release on the Central Kalahari Game Reserve (CKGR), November 2005

International Publicity on the Basarwa

22 September 2005

Central Kalahari Game Reserve (CKGR)

Repeated Call for a Return to Negotiations

12 August 2005

Central Kalahari Game Reserve (CKGR)

Support for the Return to Negotiations

18 April 2005

Constitutional (Amendment) Bill, 2004

Bill Fails to Ensure Equal Recognition and Treatment for all Ethnic Groups

11 July 2004

Central Kalahari Game Reserve (CKGR)

CKGR Case to Begin on Monday, 12 July 2004

5 July 2004

Central Kalahari Game Reserve (CKGR)

CKGR Court Case - In Loco Inspection 4-7 July 2004

29 June 2004

Central Kalahari Game Reserve (CKGR)

Residents of the CKGR to Testify in Court

4 June 2004

Press Release on the 35th Ordinary Session of the African Commission Human and Peoples' Rights

31 March 2004

DITSHWANELO’S Human Rights Film Festival 2004

16 – 23 April 2004, as Part of Maitisong Festival

21 November 2003

Press Release on the 34th Ordinary Session of the African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights

6 October 2003

Proposed Constitutional Amendment

Constitutional Amendment for Tribal Neutrality

23 May 2003

Remote Area Development Programme

Provision of Subsidies

23 January 2003

Press Release IX of the CKGR Negotiating Team

Judgement By Consent

7 November 2002

Survival International 3

Campaign Against Government of Botswana

2 September 2002

Central Kalahari Game Reserve/Basarwa VI

UN CERD Recommendations to Botswana

19 July 2002

Central Kalahari Game Reserve/Basarwa V

July Update of the Case

26 June 2002

Central Kalahari Game Reserve/Basarwa IV

Update on the Case and the Provision of Food and Water

17 May 2002

Press Release II on the 31st Ordinary Session of the African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights

1 May 2002

31st Ordinary Session of the African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights

24 April 2002

Central Kalahari Game Reserve/Basarwa III

Update on the Situation of the Residents of the CKGR

20 February 2002

Central Kalahari Game Reserve/Basarwa II

Residents of the CKGR Take Government to Court

31 January 2002

Central Kalahari Game Reserve/Basarwa I

Cessation of Essential Services To the Residents In the CKGR

9 August 2001

Survival International 2

London Vigil to Move to Durban Racism Conference

6 August 2001

World Conference Against Racism (WCAR)

Recent Threats by the United States Boycott Conference

18 July 2001

Survival International 1

London Vigil to Stop the Torture of 'Kalahari Bushmen'

25 March 1998

CKGR Negotiating Team 


Publications

DITSHWANELO's Shadow Report to The United Nations Committee On The Elimination Of Racial Discrimination (CERD), 68th Session, Geneva, 3 – 6 March 2006.

DITSHWANELO's Statement at the 37th Session of the African Commission of Human and People's Rights - 28 April 2005.

DITSHWANELO's Statement at the 34th Ordinary Session of the African Commission Human and Peoples' Rights - 10 November 2003.

Reply by Botswana at the 34th Ordinary Session of the African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights
African Commission Statement by DITSHWANELO
- 2002.

CERD (Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination) Concluding Observations on Botswana - 2002.

CERD Shadow Report - 2002.  By DITSHWANELO.

CKGR Seminar Report - 2002.

Report of Seminar on Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance - 2001
Know Your Law 5: Land Rights - 1999

Report of fact-finding mission - Basarwa Resettlement Plan in Ngamiland, Botswana - 1997.
 

Copyright©2007 Ditshwanelo.
Website by Cyberplex Africa