On 12 August 2026, controversies surrounding the implementation of Botswana’s Public Service Act No. 5, published on 6 March 2026, escalated when six public-sector trade unions filed an urgent application before the High Court in Gaborone, requesting to halt its implementation.
The Botswana’s Public Service Act No. 5 of 2026 represents a significant reform of the legal and institutional framework governing the public service, with important implications for the enabling environment for civil society and organised labour. The Act repeals and replaces the previous framework and seeks to align public-service legislation with national labour laws, ILO conventions and international labour standards. It introduces reforms relating to employment conditions, trade union rights, collective bargaining and workplace protections, while establishing the Public Service Bargaining Council (PSBC) and sectoral bargaining councils as formal mechanisms for engagement between Government and recognised public-sector unions.
Despite these reforms, the central dispute concerns the manner in which Government has pursued the reforms, with unions arguing that organised labour has been bypassed or insufficiently consulted before structural and employment-related changes were introduced. Unions have particularly objected to expanded disciplinary, recruitment and policy powers assigned to the Directorate of Public Service Management (DPSM) and the Permanent Secretary to the President, raising concerns about institutional balance and the independence of collective representation. Tensions have also arisen over unilateral changes to conditions of service, including local per diem adjustments and leadership programmes, as well as separate salary or framework agreements that unions argue fragment collective bargaining.
In response to the urgent application filed by the trade union, the Court issued a settlement and interim halt to unilateral implementation requiring DPSM to engage with the unions and provide written reasons for proposed changes, reinforcing transparency, procedural fairness and meaningful consultation before implementation.
The court intervention provides an important immediate safeguard for freedom of association, collective bargaining and social dialogue. However, the underlying disagreements over the Public Service Act, the powers of DPSM and the functioning of collective bargaining structures remain unresolved. The development is therefore mixed: while the Act introduces potentially positive labour-law reforms, the dispute highlights persistent concerns about consultation, institutional autonomy and Government’s approach to engaging organised labour in major public-service reforms.