The appearance of Directorate of Intelligence and Security (DIS) Director General Brigadier Peter Magosi before the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) this week has reignited a question that has troubled Batswana for years: Who holds the intelligence chief accountable?
It is a question that refuses to go away because it echoes a troubling chapter in our recent history. Former DIS Director General Isaac Kgosi famously created the impression that he answered to no one. That perception contributed significantly to public concern about the growing power of the intelligence agency and ultimately ended with his dismissal by then-President Mokgweetsi Masisi.
Today, many Batswana are asking whether history is repeating itself.
The issue is not whether intelligence chiefs should be independent in carrying out their duties. They should. National security institutions require a degree of operational autonomy to function effectively. The issue is whether that independence has evolved into a belief that accountability does not apply to those entrusted with extraordinary powers.
The law is clear. The DIS is not a law unto itself. It operates under legislation enacted by Parliament. Its Director General is appointed by the President and serves as the principal adviser to the President and Government on intelligence matters. The agency itself exists under the Office of the President and is subject to oversight mechanisms established by law. Therefore, any suggestion that a Director General does not answer to anyone is fundamentally incompatible with democratic governance.
Our democracy is built on a simple but powerful principle: public power must always be subject to scrutiny. Parliament scrutinises the Executive. The courts scrutinise the legality of government actions. Oversight institutions scrutinise the use of public resources. Intelligence agencies cannot be exempt from this principle simply because their work is secretive.
The lesson from Botswana’s recent history is straightforward. Institutions become strongest not when they are feared, but when they are trusted. Trust is earned through transparency, humility and accountability.
Indeed, secrecy makes accountability even more important. The country has spent years debating the powers of the DIS. Questions have been raised in Parliament, courtrooms, the media and among ordinary citizens about the agency’s conduct and its relationship with elected leaders. Government itself has acknowledged the need for stronger oversight and reforms to ensure that intelligence operations remain within the law.
President Duma Boko now faces a critical test of leadership.
This is not a call for political interference in intelligence operations. Nor is it a call for public humiliation of public servants. It is a call for clarity. The President must make it unequivocally clear that all public officials, regardless of rank or portfolio, are accountable to the Constitution, the law and the institutions of democratic oversight.
If a perception has emerged that the country’s chief intelligence officer is dismissive of parliamentary scrutiny, that perception must be addressed swiftly and decisively. Confidence in national institutions depends not only on what leaders do, but also on what citizens believe they are permitted to do.
The lesson from Botswana’s recent history is straightforward. Institutions become strongest not when they are feared, but when they are trusted. Trust is earned through transparency, humility and accountability.
The DIS performs a vital role in protecting Botswana’s national security. That role deserves respect. But respect cannot be demanded; it must be maintained through conduct that demonstrates fidelity to the law. No public servant is above scrutiny. No institution is above accountability. And no Director General, however powerful, is above the law. That principle should never be negotiable.
