The 2024 Bulela Ditswe marked exactly 12 years since the party introduced the system in 2003. Before then, the system used to determine candidates was exclusive of voices of the majority.
Over the years, Bulela Ditswe which loosely translates “let them loose” which became a common period of drama alongside controversy would prove to be just what the doctor ordered for the BDP. Albeit its glaring flaws, it has thus far humbled notable politicians while giving rockies a chance to square it off with other candidates at the national polls. In the past, some Bulela Ditswe protestors have even gone as far as the High Court, while those who ordered a re-run where defeated hands down.
In 2024, the BDP held its Bulela Ditswe in July, a little late into the day. The party had two rounds of elections spread across two weekends. For some, this spelt chaos for the party as it was marred in a number of alleged irregularities that which tainted the credibility of the voting. For others, it was a time to be merry and celebrate victory. Even so, for the BDP itself, the 2024 Bulela Ditswe seem to have caused more headache than any time in history. This time around, stringent measures were put to the fore with both the vetting and campaigning under strict scrutiny. For instance, whilst, previously potential candidates would have enjoyed media limelight, this time around they were warned to desist from media campaigns before final approval. Aspiring candidates were also reminded to remain tight-lipped on internal party affairs as the Central Committee struggled with leaking in the past.
Despite the delay, on the day of the elections, it was clear there was more than what meets the eye. Clearly all was not well within Domkrag. Signs were there that confusion reigned supreme among the electorate. What threw a spanner in the works was that many polling centres opened late, there were complaints of manipulation of voters roll and in other areas’ voting was deferred owing to shortage of ballot boxes. It became clear that many other irregularities ensued. Above this, the BDP appeared to be in sixes and sevens regarding overall oversight of the elections.
When the fat lady had sung, as customary, the 2024 elections had petitions. Out of the four(4) Member of Parliament(MPS) who protested, only one, being that of incumbent Minister of Finance Peggy Serame has seen the light of the day. Serame’s appeal has laid bare the realities of a system which many believe to be fatigued. Critics of Bulela Ditswe describe it as unfair in that the Central Committee dismissed all other protestors save for Serame. Additionally, there are those who hold dear to the notion that the system is easily manipulated to favour preferred candidates.
Nevertheless, the BDP still maintains confidence in the system. The party stressed that the Committee of 18 was undemocratic compared to Bulela Ditswe. Meanwhile, the BDP has conceded to the manipulation of the system by some, and share sentiments that it has flaws. Be that as it may, BDP insists, the flaws don’t outweigh the benefits.
According to BDP’s Communications and International Relations Committee Chairman, Kagelelo Kentse, in the past branches used to send three names to the Central Committee (CC) commonly referred to as a Committee of 18. Kentse stated that then the CC would pick one individual to represent the constituency. However, Kentse said, the process was deemed as not inclusive.
“Many felt that this did not involve membership of the branch being democrats and they felt it was not democratic as the decision is left to only a few,” he said.
Kentse further stated that to this end, primaries (Bulela Ditswe) were hatched and by far remain the most open and democratic process. He highlighted that democrats openly decide who must represent their constituency. He allayed fears that primaries are cumbersome and pose a problem to the BDP.
“Primaries are not a problem if prepared for very well and thoroughly, they can be very smooth,” he said.
According to the BDP mouthpiece, a few hiccups here and there does not necessarily make the system bad. He added that, if there are those who manipulate the system to the advantage, it still doesn’t make it any bad. He reiterated that as the BDP, they think it is a democratic process if not abused.
Asked about the deficiencies of the system, Kentse refused to share stating that they will not share with external forces. He underlined that any deficiencies or weaknesses of the system can only be discussed internally. He further denied that in some instances Bulela Ditswe is tailor made to favour candidates preferred by the party leadership over others saying those who hold that view “show a lack of understanding”. In a 2006 research paper titled: “Enhancing Intra-Party Democracy-The case of the Botswana Democratic Party” authored by former University of Botswana law scholar, Dr Zein Kebonang (now High Court Judge) together with Wankie Rodrick Wankie and published in the Journal of African Elections, the duo argued that the BDP sought to promote intra-party democracy through Bulela Ditswe.
Kebonang & Wankie (2006) contended that : “In 2001 the party came up with a new system of internal party elections for the purpose of deciding who would be nominated as its candidates for election to Parliament.
Previously the BDP had appointed candidates by means of an electoral college. Pursuant to enabling powers in its constitution the BDP established certain regulations governing the new system. These are contained in a document titled ‘Primary Elections Rules and Regulations’ and were approved at the party’s national congress in 2001.”
The scholars argued that with the Committee of 18, candidates were imposed on voters even those who had lost primary elections. To this end, they highlighted that, to some extent, the BDP, although vesting so much powers within the Central Committee, sought to devolve power. The paper further noted that this has strengthened democracy.
On the downside, the paper stated that, as a system, Bulela Ditswe had its shortfalls. It argued that it brought more tensions and disagreements in the party. According to the academics, the existence of party caucus had potential to upset the intentions of Bulela Ditswe. Furthermore, they argued that regarding rallies and campaigns, it created an image that other politicians enjoyed more support than some which created a problem for the party in the event they lost Bulela Ditswe.
To demonstrate this, in a surprising turn of events last week, the BDP Central Committee took a decision to consider Serame ahead of Dikoloti. Although this move has allegedly divided the party, the BDP posits otherwise. In a statement released dated 21 September, the party stated that it was committed to its democratic process. BDP noted its adherence to the highest standards of democracy, transparency and unity. Further, the BDP disclosed that Dikoloti remained a respected member of the party.
Even so, contrary to the assertions, Domkrag has moved to suspend Dikoloti from the party for 60 days for alleged misconduct during primary elections in the GoodHope constituency.
Meanwhile, the BDP continues to grapple with the Bulela Ditswe headache which has thus far proved to be getting weary. According to some observers, the system is now a shadow of its former self deserving to be reviewed to promote inter-party democracy.
