Doctors warn government over delayed Call policy resolution

Botswana Doctors Union (BDU) President, Dr. Kefilwe Selema, has clarified that doctors are not on strike but are working the legally mandated number of hours. He emphasized that the union’s demands align with recommendations from the International Labour Organisation (ILO), stating that anything less would amount to servitude for employees.“A tired doctor is a hazard,” Selema warned, stressing the dangers posed to the nation if the government fails to address their concerns.Selema expressed disappointment over the perceived lack of urgency from political leaders, stating that government technocrats merely follow instructions rather than taking decisive action. He refuted claims that doctors are engaging in a strike, stating that the government’s interpretation of their stance is incorrect.Legal Dispute Over Call PolicyThe BDU has voiced frustration over repeated delays in a legal case filed by the Directorate of Public Service Management (DPSM) and the Attorney General (AG) concerning the controversial "one call per doctor per month" policy. Initially filed on an urgent basis before the Industrial Court, the matter has faced multiple postponements since an interdict was issued on April 18, 2025.Although the hearing was originally scheduled for April 25, BDU attempted to expedite the process by proposing an earlier date of April 23. However, the government's legal representatives requested additional time to review case documents and consult their client, leading the court to maintain April 25 as the hearing date.When proceedings resumed, the government unexpectedly replaced its legal counsel due to an emergency that required the original advocate’s presence in Johannesburg. The newly appointed attorney then sought more time to familiarize themselves with the case. Despite frustration over the continued delays, the presiding judge granted the request, awarding costs for the day to BDU.Unexpected ObstaclesThe matter was rescheduled for a full hearing on April 27 at noon. However, the case was disrupted once again when the presiding judge suffered a medical emergency and was placed on certified sick leave until May 2.Despite being officially on leave, the judge extended the rule nisi—a temporary court order—until May 2, prompting BDU to question the procedural appropriateness of such an action.The union argued that medical leave, particularly when supported by a medical certificate, signifies a professional incapacity to fulfill one's duties. With the Industrial Court comprising seven judges,BDU urged that the case be reassigned to another available judge to ensure timely resolution.BDU emphasized that the case was initially filed as an urgent application by DPSM and the Attorney General and should therefore be treated with the urgency it demands.Call for ActionThe union has raised concerns about the legitimacy of a judge issuing directives while officially incapacitated, pointing to legal precedent supporting the reassignment of urgent matters that have not yet been fully argued.BDU warned that the ongoing delays are more than procedural setbacks—they pose real risks to public healthcare services. In its statement, the union urged its members to uphold their legal obligations regarding call duties and disregard directives that lack a legal basis.Additionally, BDU appealed to the public, emphasizing the seriousness of the matter and the potential harm posed by continued delays in resolving the case.

Explore

More

News

Doctors warn government over delayed Call policy resolution