HOW THE GLOBAL INFORMS THE LOCAL: THE BOTSWANA CITIZENSHIP CASE

Abstract

In this article I put forward the following positions. First is that women in Africa have not been involved in the formulation and/or interpretation and or implementation of what are now accepted norms and concepts that inform current notions of human rights, democracy, and good governance. Second, women's contact with systems that are traditionally viewed as the bedrock of democracy and good governance have been from a position of weakness, in roles of servants, objects, and exceptions to the general rule. Third, women have not been participants, on an equal basis with men, in the negotiation, formulation, development, and implementation of national constitutions. Fourth, many national constitutions fail to guarantee women equal rights with men under the law. Fifth, I suggest that only when women are equal actors in the process can there be a legitimate claim that Africa is on the road to democracy. Finally, the local cannot remain isolated and exclusively self-informing, and, consequently, the global must inform and influence the local. Such influence is legitimate, justified, and necessary if women are to gain their human rights at the local level. I use my case, that is, the case of The Attorney General of the Republic of Botswana v Unity Dow Civil Appeal No. 4/91, often referred to as the Citizenship Case, or the Dow Case, to demonstrate these positions. This is a case in which I successfully challenged the Citizenship Act of 1984 on the grounds that it discriminated against women.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 16 citations exist upstream.