This article is from the source 'bbc' and was first published or seen on . It will not be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/rss/-/1/hi/world/africa/6174709.stm

The article has changed 15 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 6 Version 7
Botswana bushmen in legal setback Botswana bushmen ruling awaited
(30 minutes later)
Bushmen from the Kalahari desert evicted from the land four years ago may not return, one of three judges presiding over the case has ruled. Bushmen from the Kalahari desert are awaiting the full outcome of a court's verdict on whether they were moved illegally from their traditional lands.
In a blow to the bushmen, the judge decided in favour of the government, which evicted the group in 2002. The Botswanan government rehoused them four years ago.
But two other judges have yet to rule on the case, the longest and most expensive in Botswana's history. Two of the judges hearing the case have delivered their verdicts - one in favour, one against - with the finding of the third judge still awaited.
The case is seen as a wider test of whether governments can legally move people from their ancestral lands.
Crowds of the Bushmen trekked overland to the court to wait for the verdict.
Botswana's Chief Justice, Maruping Dibotelo, ruled that the case should be dismissed, because the government had not unlawfully deprived the Bushmen of their land.
But a second judge, Unity Dow, told the court in the town of Lobatse that the Bushmen had not voluntarily left their land.
The case is the longest and most expensive in Botswana's history.
The government argues that the bushmen abandoned their traditional ways long ago, and have no claim to the area.The government argues that the bushmen abandoned their traditional ways long ago, and have no claim to the area.
'No merit'
In his judgement, panel chairman Maruping Dibotelo said the bushmen's argument that the government had acted illegally and unconstitutionally by cutting off water, food and sanitary services at a game reserve "has no merit and I reject it".
He also rejected the bushmen's claim that the government had given them insufficient warning before effectively forcing them out of the area.
"The government consulted the residents of the settlement inside the CKGR (Central Kalahari Game Reserve) extensively before the termination of services," he told the court in the town of Lobatse.
"The contention of the applicants that the government unlawfully deprived them of their land ... must fail."
The BBC's Orla Guerin, who is at the court, says there has been a very subdued reaction from the bushmen who had gathered to hear the verdict.
'Dispiriting' camps'Dispiriting' camps
The San people brought their case forward after being moved to functional but bleak settlements outside the Kalahari game reserve, where a new way of life was imposed.The San people brought their case forward after being moved to functional but bleak settlements outside the Kalahari game reserve, where a new way of life was imposed.
But the government says the bushmen do not belong to the Kalahari any more because their lifestyle has changed, and their presence interferes with conservation.But the government says the bushmen do not belong to the Kalahari any more because their lifestyle has changed, and their presence interferes with conservation.
The reserve was a poverty trap that denied them access to health and education, it says, arguing that the bushmen are better off in the settlements, where they have clinics and schools along with better access to food and water.The reserve was a poverty trap that denied them access to health and education, it says, arguing that the bushmen are better off in the settlements, where they have clinics and schools along with better access to food and water.
They also deny allegations that the bushmen were driven out to make way for diamond mining.They also deny allegations that the bushmen were driven out to make way for diamond mining.
The bushmen's lawyer contends that although there are facilities in the camps, there is little for them to do.The bushmen's lawyer contends that although there are facilities in the camps, there is little for them to do.
"Almost everybody is dependent, to a greater or lesser extent, on handouts and that's a rather dispiriting experience," Gordon Bennet says."Almost everybody is dependent, to a greater or lesser extent, on handouts and that's a rather dispiriting experience," Gordon Bennet says.
What are your views on the Botswana case? How can land belonging to indigenous people be better protected? Send us your comments and experiences. What are your views on the Botswana case? How can land belonging to indigenous people be better protected? Send us your comments and experiences.
Click here to send us your commentsClick here to send us your comments