Suchergebnisse

It has been argued that the leadership of Botswana has upheld liberal democracy hence the birth of an admirable nation. However reality has revealed that the Constitution of Botswana is shallow in promoting democracy. The Constitution of Botswana which espouses an executive presidency has vested sweeping powers in the Presidency. It is probable that a traditionalist culture of respect and authority, hindered any disputing of the post-colonial dispensation, and overlooked the absolutism of the Constitution. In terms of the Constitution of Botswana, the President is both Head of State and Head of Government. Thus the presidency has sweeping powers across a diverse range of areas and acts with little review. This defeats the system of check and balances which is necessary for democracy. The paper therefore argues that an executive Presidency is absolutist hence threatens the legitimacy of democracy.

Botswana has in the past received accolades of being the most peaceful country in Southern Africa. Any disturbance of this peace is either shunned or seen as a departure from the norm. The advent of trade unions in Botswana has always been looked at with suspicion and they have been seen as militant, which is contrary to the peaceful existence the country has enjoyed regardless of the fact that it is surrounded by countries that have been to war at some point in their history. Therefore, the state has made it a point that any sign of unrest is severely dealt with by the government. Some employees were dismissed un-procedurally as disciplinary procedures were not followed and the court ruled in the employee's favour in 2012. The majority of those dismissed were from the essential services sections of government even though at the beginning some were released through the strike rules agreement between government and unions. Laid down disciplinary rules and procedures of having a hearing were not followed.

This study investigates the effectiveness of Presidential Directives in comparison to the traditional policy process in Botswana. More precisely, the study determines whether the use of Presidential Directives is a more efficient and effective means of achieving policy outputs, as compared to the traditional policy process. To achieve this, the study conducted a comprehensive analysis of policies and Presidential Directives in Botswana, examining the processes through which they were formulated, implemented, and evaluated. The methodological approach adopted includes an intrepretivist research paradigm as well as a qualitative research approach for both data collection and analysis. Results reveals that Presidential directives achieve outputs faster and more effectively than the traditional policy process, Presidential Directives may have some advantages in terms of speed and flexibility, but they are not necessarily more effective than the traditional policy process in achieving their planned outcomes, policy process, which involves stakeholder consultation, evidence-based decision-making and comprehensive analysis of the policy context, is a more reliable and effective means of policy-making in the long term. However, the study also found that there are some areas where Presidential Directives may be more appropriate, such as in emergency situations or when quick decisions are required. Overall, this research provides valuable insights into the effectiveness of different approaches to policy-making in Botswana, and its findings have important implications for policymakers, practitioners, and researchers in the field of public policy. The study recommends transparency and accountability; stakeholder engagement; evidence-based policy-making and comprehensive policy evaluation.