Bran’s Sight, Blind Decisions: Seeing Everything, Changing Nothing 

After gaining independence, Botswana like many African countries initially emphasized efforts to build a nation-state. That in turn, has led to a symphony where only the conductor has a microphone and a ship whose steering wheel is too far from the engine. It had a highly centralizing effect and a negative impact on the efficient delivery of public services and local governance. 

Like “ Bran the Broken”, Botswana’s central authorities see the cracks- public service failures, rural neglect etc. but they remain curiously still. Hypothetically,  this is not because they are not aware, but because the system has normalized observation without obligation. Inaction is cloaked as watchfulness. 

The Wall and The North; Forgotten Beyond the Castle 

A 1995 Commonwealth Secretariat report emphasized that excessive centralization in Commonwealth African countries often leads to delayed responses, inefficiency and disempowerment of local authorities. Ministries  are at grip of decision making power while local councils act as passive implementers. This often leads to national development plans failing to reflect into localized action because regional bodies lack autonomy and resources. The report also highlights a trend where government develop progressive frameworks and decentralization strategies, but still stall at implementation due to bureaucracy, political risk or lack of will. Bran sees the future but does not move. Likewise, Botswana’s leadership envisions reform through its Local Government Act, but remains inert.

 It further notes that centralized government often serves to preserve elite political control. In Botswana, central government controls budget allocation, hiring, and planning even at the local level, asserting that centralized power does not act because it is not incentivized to. The decentralization policy of the government of Botswana is accompanied and implemented primarily through devolution to three types of local authorities. These are city, district and town councils, land boards and tribal administration. Actual transfer of power to local governments as to having independence to make binding decisions and control their own budgets is largely absent. 

A Crown with no Sword 

One of the clearest examples of passive centralized power in Botswana is the land governance system. District Land Boards were set to manage tribal land at district level, theoretically giving communities a say in how their land is allocated, developed or preserved. However, an amendment centralized this process, giving the Minister greater authority in appointing Land Board members. This adjustment limited local participation,  reduced transparency and public trust. It also increased the risk of politicizing land administration.

Although members of the land boards are supposed to be apolitical, it is well noted that some of them were those who lost the primary elections in the past administration.Questioning its credibility, Member of Parliament for Shashe West, Jeremiah Frenzel had asked the Minister of Lands and Agriculture, Dr Micus Chimbombi in parliament if he is aware of such malpractice.

The Throne Besides the Throne 

Tribal administration is visible, admired, and ultimately restricted under Botswana’s political structure, much like a ceremonial crown next to the actual seat of power. Although dikgosi( chiefs) are acknowledged by the constitution, central government authority has severely limited their ability to influence local government and decision making. Despite having cultural authority and presiding over communal affairs, they mostly act as advisers in state governance. Tensions within the Bangwato tribe are particularly noticeable in this regard, since remote communities such as Nata have voiced their displeasure with the uneven growth as they have to travel all the way to Serowe to access public services, therefore demand local governmental autonomy. 

The same communities, however, still show their respect for the Paramount Chief, former President Ian Khama, whose Kgotla gatherings continue to attract significant, loyal crowds. Similar to Bran, dikgosi are viewed as guardians of tradition rather than catalysts for change, maintaining a watchful eye over a nation they are no longer able to significantly influence.

Health without Hands 

After more than 10 years of centralized health care governance, the government of Botswana officially returned control of public clinics, home-based care, district health management teams, and community health programs to the Ministry of Local Government and Traditional Affairs in April 2025. This marked a significant step towards decentralization. Although this change recognizes the deficiencies of centralized service delivery, it also poses a new query: are local councils equipped to handle these responsibilities?.

In the past, Botswana’s councils have been known for their reliance on central instruction, poor service performance, and insufficient staffing. They are tasked with among others; overall district development, including support of production activity and social development The worry is not that decentralization would not occur, but rather that it might only push inefficiencies to the peripheral. The revolution runs the risk of becoming a symbolic handover, another instance of watchfulness without movement- in the absence of capacity building, accountability frameworks and authentic community engagement. 

 Hollow Governance without Teeth

 A government is not decentralized according to political theorist Jonathan Rodden, “ unless the nation contains autonomous, elected subnational governments capable of making binding decisions in at least some policy areas”. Botswana’s decentralization initiatives are still incredibly superficial by the the metric. We are still bound to the same central command even though the recent transfer of clinics and health teams to the Ministry of Local Government may seem like a change on paper. This is because local entities lack true fiscal autonomy, legislative capacity, and direct electoral legitimacy. 

Power without autonomy is not decentralization, it is delegation. In Botswana, delegation often comes wrapped in symbolism, not substance. The realm watches, the rulers see, but the people still wait.