The 2025 Administration of Justice (AOJ) annual report paints a stark picture of a justice system mired in paralysis, with Gender-Based Violence (GBV) cases bearing the brunt of chronic resource shortages. Despite the introduction of specialized dockets intended to streamline these cases, the disposal rate for GBV matters has slipped to 44.88%, down from 46.08% in 2023.
Notably, the report omits the breakdown of disposal rates and pending cases by individual magisterial stations; a detail that previous reports diligently provided. According to the latest figures, 2,815 GBV cases were carried over from the close of 2024, while 2,397 new cases were registered throughout 2025. This brought the total caseload for the year to 5,212. Of these, 2,339 cases reached completion, leaving 2,873 unresolved in the courts.
The clearance rate of 44.88% in 2025 marks a slight decline from the 46.08% recorded in 2023. Although the 2024 report lacked comprehensive GBV statistics, it noted that the clearance ratios for eight courts, including Bobonong, Broadhurst, Extension II, Francistown, Ghanzi, Gumare, Hukuntsi, and Jwaneng, ranged from 0.84 to 1.40. A clearance ratio below 1.00 signals a growing backlog, while a figure above 1.00 suggests progress in reducing it.
The detailed 2023 report had highlighted a 13% increase in the disposal of GBV cases, encompassing offences such as rape, assault, defilement, and restraining orders. It also revealed that most magistrates handling GBV cases were simultaneously managing mainstream caseloads, with rape cases notably delayed by forensic evidence processing, which averages a year’s wait.
Further insights from the 2025 report show magistrates’ courts grappling with a total caseload of 11,346 cases. Of these, 6,938 were carried forward from 2024, 4,408 were newly registered, and 4,186 were completed, leaving 7,160 cases pending. The disposal rate for criminal cases stood at a mere 36.89%. Among the various judicial dockets, the GBV specialized courts rank among the poorest performers, alongside criminal and stock theft courts.
While the report stops short of explicitly diagnosing the causes behind the sluggish GBV case processing, it underscores profound challenges afflicting the courts. “Magistrates’ Courts face significant, systemic challenges which require urgent attention. These issues range from overwhelming caseloads to deficits in resources and security. Such challenges impede the administration of justice and compromise the effectiveness of the courts.”
The AOJ spotlights the excessive case-to-magistrate ratio as the principal concern, especially at busy Chief Magistrates’ stations and moderately active Principal Magistrates’ stations. This imbalance fuels case backlogs and delays, undermining both the quality and thoroughness of judicial decisions, as magistrates struggle to keep pace with their mounting caseloads.
“The relentless volume of work also negatively affects judicial well-being, leading to burnout and chronic stress among magistrates. Magistrates’ Courts are crippled by a widespread lack of essential resources, which are severely hindering daily operations and efficiency.”
Resource shortages encompass severe personnel deficits, with a critical lack of both magistrates and support staff hampering the courts’ capacity to manage workloads effectively. “Some stations, such as Shakawe, Palapye, and Gumare, are run by a single Magistrate. Many stations lack basic modern infrastructure, including access to the internet, and there are insufficient computers for the support personnel. Facilities are often dilapidated.”
Compounding these issues is a dire supply crisis. A government moratorium on issuing Government Purchase Orders has left courts unable to procure fundamental necessities. Requests for authorization to buy basic items like stationery remain unanswered. The shortage is so acute that some stations lack essentials such as diaries for scheduling cases, printing paper for typed proceedings, court orders, judgments, and even basic light bulbs to illuminate courtrooms, further exacerbating the problem of decaying infrastructure.
“Specialized courts, designed to handle specific types of cases efficiently (e.g., child maintenance cases, stock theft cases, small claims), are currently specialized in name only. Due to the overarching shortage of magistrates, officers designated for specialized courts are frequently allocated general caseloads.”
This practice effectively nullifies the intended benefits of specialization, causing delays in disposing of cases within these dockets. For example, at Francistown Magistrates’ Court, magistrates alternate duties instead of having a dedicated judicial officer, undermining efficiency and consistency.
The International Commission of Jurists (ICJ) commissioner Patricia Schulz emphasized that, particularly for domestic violence, police, health, social, forensic, educational, and judicial services must be trained to identify cases early and respond immediately, free from gender bias. She asserted that once GBV has occurred, measures must be taken and monitored to prevent recurrence, through eviction, protection, restraining, or emergency barring orders.
A study published on June 25, 2025, by Dr. Paul Masumbe and Pumza Nomnganga, titled “Anti-gender-based violence laws’ in addressing the scourge of gender-based violence in South Africa,” highlighted the criminal justice system’s failure to effectively address GBV cases. This failure has stigmatized the system and eroded public trust.
In response to inquiries by this publication, Lorato Moalusi, CEO of the Botswana Gender Based Violence Prevention and Support Centre, said the persistent backlog deters survivors from reporting incidents, as resolution and perpetrator accountability take too long. “This further allows perpetrators to continue to harm survivors and other people. It defeats the purpose of accessible and equitable justice. And thus lessens the trust that people have in the justice system.”
Moalusi noted that her center, following a one-stop service center model at its Gaborone location, offers counseling (psychosocial support and legal information), clinical care, and temporary and emergency shelter services.
“While the systems may be there, the main challenge is accessibility, trained staff, clear and direct interventions, and the handling of matters. Are people aware of the One Stop Service Centers? Where are they, and how are they accessible? Those are some of the questions that we must ask. Indeed, if the Centers are functional and effective, that will assist, as we believe that they add to the ‘specialized services’ to decrease GBV in Botswana.”
She stressed that having a One-Stop Service Centre facilitates faster, more comprehensive evidence collection because service providers operate under one roof and communicate effectively. “They will also force service providers to expedite cases due to high volumes. This is with the hope that survivors will be encouraged to report, considering that they will not need to repeat their story every time they visit each service provider.”
To preserve the focus of specialized courts, Moalusi insisted there must be a deliberate, unwavering commitment to GBV matters, as originally intended by the AOJ. “It should not be a momentous issue that is deeply harmful, dangerous, and persistent in our country. Civil society and survivors must continue to advocate and lobby for the prioritization of GBV matters in Botswana.”
She called for deliberate infrastructure development and increased visibility of these courts to support those in need.
Moalusi lauded AOJ’s most significant achievement as the establishment and operationalization of these courts nationwide, transitioning them from ad hoc arrangements to full-time dedicated entities accessible to all who require their services. “Effectiveness of the courts with fully trained and capacitated staff that is aware of the sensitivity and complexity of gender-based violence, particularly on the affected persons.”