2001 Botswana judicial reform referendum

Last updated

A referendum on judicial reform was held in Botswana on 3 November 2001, having been originally scheduled for 6 October, but later postponed. [1] The referendum asked eight separate questions about judges and courts, all of which were approved, seven by a margin of over 70%. Voter turnout for the referendum was just 4.9%, with 22,600 votes from a total of 460,252 registered voters. [2] The postponement of the referendum by the government, a legal challenge by the Tswana nationalist group Pitso Ya Batswana, and a call by the group for a boycott were all suggested as reasons for the low turnout. [3] Pitso Ya Batswana claimed that the referendum was an attempt by the BaKalanga ethnic group, who are over-represented in the judicial system, to increase their hold over it. [3]

Contents

Question I

The first question was regarding qualification of candidates to be appointed judges on the High Court:

Do you agree that, for a person to be appointed a Judge of the High Court, he must qualify and have been qualified to practice as an advocate or attorney for not less than 10 years, or being qualified to practice as an advocate or attorney, has taught law in a recognized university for not less than 10 years, or be a Chief Magistrate who has held that office for not less than 5 years?

The proposal was passed with a 74.2% approval. [2]

ChoiceVotes%
For16,03874.2
Against5,57425.8
Invalid/blank votes985
Total22,597100
Registered voters/turnout460,2524.9
Source: African Elections Database

Question II

The second question was regarding qualification of candidates to be appointed judges on the Court of Appeal:

Do you agree that, for a person to be appointed a Judge of the Court of Appeal, he must qualify and have been qualified to practice as an advocate or attorney for not less than 10 years, or being qualified to practice as an advocate or attorney, has taught law in a recognized university for not less than 10 years?

The proposal was passed with a 74.81% approval. [2]

ChoiceVotes%
For16,15274.8
Against5,43625.2
Invalid/blank votes988
Total22,576100
Registered voters/turnout460,2524.9
Source: African Elections Database

Question III

The third question was regarding a change in the designation of High Court judges:

Do you agree that the designation of High Court Judges as "Puisne Judges" be altered to "Judges"?

The proposal was passed with a 76.74% approval. [2]

ChoiceVotes%
For16,56576.7
Against5,01923.3
Invalid/blank votes995
Total22,579100
Registered voters/turnout460,2524.9
Source: African Elections Database

Question IV

The fourth question was regarding raising the retirement age of High Court and Court of Appeal judges:

Do you agree that the retiring age of the Judges of the High Court and Court of Appeal should be increased from 65 to 70?

The proposal was passed, although with only a 53.93% approval, far lower than any of the other questions. [2]

ChoiceVotes%
For11,75153.9
Against10,03746.1
Invalid/blank votes789
Total22,577100
Registered voters/turnout460,2524.9
Source: African Elections Database

Question V

The fifth question was regarding the nomination of members of the Judicial Service Commission:

Do you agree that the members of the Judicial Service Commission who are nominated by the Law Society or appointed by the President shall serve a renewable term of two years, and may be removed by the Commission in the first case and by the President in the second for inability or gross misbehavior?

The proposal was passed with a 72.45% approval. [2]

ChoiceVotes%
For15,76572.5
Against5,99427.5
Invalid/blank votes802
Total22,561100
Registered voters/turnout460,2524.9
Source: African Elections Database

Question VI

The sixth question was regarding the Judicial Service Commission:

Do you agree that the members of the Judicial Service Commission, who shall decide by a majority vote, the chairman having a casting vote in the event of an equality of votes, should be the Chief Justice as Chairman, the President or the most senior Justice of the Court of Appeal, the Attorney-General, the Chairman of the Public Service Commission, a member of the Law Society nominated by it, and a person of integrity and experience who is not a legal practitioner appointed by the President?

The proposal was passed with a 72.68% approval. [2]

ChoiceVotes%
For15,83372.7
Against5,95127.3
Invalid/blank votes789
Total22,573100
Registered voters/turnout460,2524.9
Source: African Elections Database

Question VII

The seventh question was regarding the Industrial Court:

Do you agree that the Industrial Court should be a superior court of record?

The proposal was passed with a 74.5% approval. [2]

ChoiceVotes%
For16,21674.5
Against5,54925.5
Invalid/blank votes792
Total22,557100
Registered voters/turnout460,2524.9
Source: African Elections Database

Question VIII

The eighth and last question was regarding the Chief Justice:

Do you agree that the Chief Justice be empowered to appoint a Rules of Court Advisory Committee to advise him on the review of the rules of practice and procedure of the High Court?

The proposal was passed with a 76.68% approval, the highest of all the proposals. [2]

ChoiceVotes%
For16,58476.9
Against4,89523.1
Invalid/blank votes1,023
Total22,592100
Registered voters/turnout460,2524.9
Source: African Elections Database

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Government of Botswana</span>

The Government of Botswana often abbreviated as GOB, is the union government created by the constitution of Botswana having the executive, parliament, and the judiciary. The Seat of the Government is located in Gaborone, Botswana. The government is led by the president.

An ecclesiastical court, also called court Christian or court spiritual, is any of certain courts having jurisdiction mainly in spiritual or religious matters. In the Middle Ages, these courts had much wider powers in many areas of Europe than before the development of nation states. They were experts in interpreting canon law, a basis of which was the Corpus Juris Civilis of Justinian, which is considered the source of the civil law legal tradition.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Courts of Denmark</span> System of judiciary and courts in Kingdom of Denmark

The Courts of Denmark is the ordinary court system of the Kingdom of Denmark. The Courts of Denmark as an organizational entity was created with the Police and Judiciary Reform Act taking effect 1 January 2007 which also significantly reformed the court system e.g. by removing original jurisdiction from the High Courts and by introducing a new jury system.

Chapter 9: Judiciary.Chapter 9 of the 1997 Constitution of Fiji is titled Judiciary. It is divided into twenty-two sections, setting out the composition and functions of the Judicial branch of the Fijian government.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Maryland Court of Appeals</span> Highest court in the U.S. state of Maryland

The Court of Appeals of Maryland is the highest court of the U.S. state of Maryland. The court, which is composed of one chief judge and six associate judges, meets in the Robert C. Murphy Courts of Appeal Building in the state capital, Annapolis. The term of the Court begins the second Monday of September. The Court is unique among American courts in that the judges wear red robes. The Maryland Court of Appeals joins the New York Court of Appeals in being the only two state highest courts to bear the name "Court of Appeals" rather than "Supreme Court", though the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals is that state's highest criminal court that bears the name "Court of Appeals".

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Government of Maryland</span> State government of the United States

The government of Maryland is conducted according to the Maryland Constitution. The United States is a federation; consequently, the government of Maryland, like the other 49 state governments, has exclusive authority over matters that lie entirely within the state's borders, except as limited by the Constitution of the United States.

The Alaska Court System is the unified, centrally administered, and totally state-funded judicial system for the state of Alaska. The Alaska District Courts are the primary misdemeanor trial courts, the Alaska Superior Courts are the primary felony trial courts, and the Alaska Supreme Court and the Alaska Court of Appeals are the primary appellate courts. The chief justice of the Alaska Supreme Court is the administrative head of the Alaska Court System.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Caribbean Court of Justice</span>

The Caribbean Court of Justice is the judicial institution of the Caribbean Community (CARICOM). Established in 2005, it is based in Port of Spain, Trinidad and Tobago.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">A. Raymond Randolph</span> American judge

Arthur Raymond Randolph is a Senior United States Circuit Judge of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. He was appointed to the Court in 1990 and assumed senior status on November 1, 2008.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Judiciary of Israel</span> Part of the article of the series of governament of Israel

The judicial system of Israel consists of secular courts and religious courts. The law courts constitute a separate and independent unit of Israel's Ministry of Justice. The system is headed by the President of the Supreme Court and the Minister of Justice.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Judiciary of Pakistan</span>

The judiciary of Pakistan is a hierarchical system with two classes of courts: the superior judiciary and the subordinate judiciary. The superior judiciary is composed of the Supreme Court of Pakistan, the Federal Shariat Court and five High Courts, with the Supreme Court at the apex. There is a High Court for each of the four provinces as well as a High Court for the Islamabad Capital Territory. The Constitution of Pakistan entrusts the superior judiciary with the obligation to preserve, protect and defend the constitution. Neither the Supreme Court nor a High Court may exercise jurisdiction in relation to Tribal Areas, except otherwise provided for. The disputed regions of Azad Kashmir and Gilgit–Baltistan have separate court systems.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Government of Oklahoma</span> Government of the U.S. state of Oklahoma

The government of the U.S. State of Oklahoma, established by the Oklahoma Constitution, is a republican democracy modeled after the federal government of the United States. The state government has three branches: the executive, legislative, and judicial. Through a system of separation of powers or "checks and balances," each of these branches has some authority to act on its own, some authority to regulate the other two branches, and has some of its own authority, in turn, regulated by the other branches.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Oklahoma Judicial Nominating Commission</span>

The Oklahoma Judicial Nominating Commission is the judicial nominating commission of the U.S. state of Oklahoma. It selects potential justices and judges for gubernatorial appointments for judges for state appellate courts.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Constitution of Botswana</span> The constitution of the Republic of Botswana

The present Constitution of Botswana commenced on September 30, 1966.

The law of the Republic of China as applied in Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu is based on civil law with its origins in the modern Japanese and German legal systems. The main body of laws are codified into the Six Codes:

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Constitution of Kenya</span> Supreme law of the Republic of Kenya

The Constitution of Kenya is the supreme law of the Republic of Kenya. There have been three significant versions of the constitution, with the most recent redraft being enabled in 2010. The 2010 edition replaced the 1963 independence constitution. The constitution was presented to the Attorney General of Kenya on 7 April 2010, officially published on 6 May 2010, and was subjected to a referendum on 4 August 2010. The new Constitution was approved by 67% of Kenyan voters. The constitution was promulgated on 27 August 2010.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Judicial Service Commission (Kenya)</span>

The Judicial Service Commission (JSC) of Kenya is an independent Commission established under Article 171 of the Constitution of Kenya. Its mandate as stipulated in Article 172 of the Constitution is to promote and facilitate the independence and accountability of the Judiciary and the efficient, effective and transparent administration of justice. The commission has 11 members with the initial team appointed in December 2010.

<i>R (Miller) v Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union</i> Constitutional decision of Supreme Court

R (Miller) v Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union is a United Kingdom constitutional law case decided by the United Kingdom Supreme Court on 24 January 2017, which ruled that the British Government might not initiate withdrawal from the European Union by formal notification to the Council of the European Union as prescribed by Article 50 of the Treaty on European Union without an Act of Parliament giving the government Parliament's permission to do so. Two days later, the government responded by bringing to Parliament the European Union Act 2017 for first reading in the House of Commons on 26 January 2017. The case is informally referred to as "the Miller case" or "Miller I".

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Scottish Sentencing Council</span>

The Scottish Sentencing Council is an advisory non-departmental public body in Scotland that produces sentencing guidelines for use in the High Court of Justiciary, sheriff courts and justice of the peace courts. Judges, sheriffs, and justices of the peace must use the guidelines to inform the sentence they pronounce against a convict, and they must give reasons for not following the guidelines.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">2017 Maine Question 1</span>

Maine Question 1, formally An Act To Allow Slot Machines or a Casino in York County, was a citizen-initiated referendum question that appeared on the November 7, 2017, statewide ballot in Maine. It sought to award a license for the construction and operation of a casino in York County, Maine by a qualified entity as spelled out in the proposed law, with tax revenue generated by the casino to go to specific programs. The wording of the proposed law effectively permitted only one company, Capital 7, to be awarded the license. The ballot measure was defeated, with 83% of voters opposing it.

References