Interights & Ditshwanelo v. The Republic of Botswana
Communication 319/06 - Interights &Ditshwanelo v. The Republic of Botswana
Summary of the Complaint
1. The Complaint is filed by the International Centre for Human Rights (Interights)1 , and Ditshwanelo-the
Botswana Human Rights Centre (the Complainants), on behalf of Mr. Oteng Modisane Ping (the Victim),
against the Republic of Botswana, (Respondent State), State Party to the African Charter.
2. The Complainants allege that the Victim was accused of the murder of his girlfriend and her son in 2002,
and was accordingly convicted and sentenced by the High Court of the Respondent State to fifteen years
imprisonment for the murder of his girlfriend, and to death by hanging for the murder of her 6 year old son.
3. In February 2005, the Victim appealed but the Court of the Appeal, which is the highest judicial authority
in the country, dismissed the appeals in both cases. In dismissing the appeals, the Court of Appeal
observed that the extenuating circumstances had already been considered with regard to the murder of the
girlfriend and that the same did not apply in the murder of the son.
4. On 1 February 2006, the Victim submitted an appeal for clemency to the President of the Respondent
State. At the time of making the Complaint, the Complainants believed that the decision to deny the Victim
clemency had already been communicated to the prisons department and his warrant of death signed.
5. The Complainants also allege that despite the fact that the Prison's Act stipulates that a minimum of 24
hour notice should be given to the Prisoner before execution, the prison authorities have in practice used
this requirement as a maximum requirement and proceeded to block access to the prisoner within that
twenty-four (24) hour period. In the present case, it is alleged that the Victim's mother and Ditshwanelo
(appointed counsel for the Victim) had both been denied access to the Victim before his execution.
6. The Complainants further allege a continuous violation of the right to life in Botswana by the imposition of
the death penalty in Botswana. Additionally, the manner in which the death penalty is carried out by
hanging also constitutes cruel, inhuman and degrading punishment. Lastly, the secrecy of executions and
the lack of proper notification before executions severely compromise the right to pursue all avenues of
justice on behalf of a prisoner.
7. The Complainants aver that there are no local remedies which can be pursued in Botswana since the
Court of Appeal has already made a ruling on the constitutionality of the death penalty in Botswana. 2
Articles alleged to have been violated
8. The Complainants allege that the Respondent State has violated Articles 1, 4 and 5 of the African
Charter.
The Procedure
9. The Secretariat received a Complaint from the Complainants on 31 March 2006 and acknowledged its
receipt on 1 April 2006. Accompanying the Complaint was also a request for Provisional Measures in
accordance with Rule 111 of the Commission's Rules of Procedure.
10. At its 39th Ordinary Session held from 11 to 25 May 2006 in Banjul, The Gambia, the Commission was
seized of the Complaint and the parties were informed on 5 June 2006. Subsequently, the Complainants
were requested to make their submissions on the Admissibility of the Communication. A copy of the
Complaint and the decision on seizure was also transmitted to the Respondent State. On 10 October 2006,
the Secretariat of the Commission sent reminders to the parties to submit their arguments on Admissibility
by 25
1