Abstract
In 2003, the Botswanan Court of Appeal decided in Kanane v The State that discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation was not proscribed by the Botswanan Constitution because no evidence had been adduced showing that the society of Botswana was ready for gay individuals. After sixteen years, things changed: in 2019, in Letsweletse Motshidiemang and LEGABIBO (as amicus) v The Attorney General, the High Court held that the law criminalizing anal intercourse violated the fundamental rights of gay people. In 2021, the Court of Appeal upheld the High Court decision. This commentary briefly examines these three decisions. It argues that Kanane gave too much weight to public opinion to the detriment of constitutional interpretation. Through a robust approach to generous interpretation of fundamental rights, the Motshidiemang decisions partly remedied the flaw in Kanane. However, judicial clarification is still required on some aspects of the decision.
Original language | English |
---|---|
Pages (from-to) | 1-9 |
Journal | Journal of African Law |
Early online date | 3 Jul 2023 |
DOIs | |
Publication status | E-pub ahead of print - 3 Jul 2023 |
Keywords
- Kanane v The State
- Motshidiemang v The Attorney General
- “carnal knowledge against the order of nature”
- LGBTQ+ rights
- Botswana