Analysis Of Botswana S Wildlife Policies And Laws

Botswana has a long history of wildlife conservation dating back to 1890 when the first game protection statute was enacted. Since that time, wildlife policies and laws have been developed to address increased threats to wildlife, especially poaching and trafficking in wildlife products. Botswana now has in place various strategies and policies on wildlife conservation and management which guide the enactment of wildlife legislation. The key wildlife law is the Wildlife Conservation and National parks Act enacted in 1992. The Act sets out the institutional and administrative framework of the wildlife. There are strong provisions that strictly regulate wildlife conservation and utilization and address wildlife crime and wildlife law enforcement. Nevertheless, there are still some gaps that exist within the law that need to be sealed in order to effectively curb wildlife crime. Botswana is quite robust in adopting international standards to address wildlife crime and has enacted legislation to stop illegal trade in wildlife and wildlife products and deter profiting from wildlife crime by confiscating proceeds of crime and criminalizing money laundering. Legislation to curb corruption among public officials, including those who deal with wildlife matters, is in place and its rigorous enforcement has led to Botswana being one of the least corrupt countries in Africa. The effectiveness of the wildlife legislation in Botswana cannot be accurately gauged as there is little information on the number of wildlife crimes committed and the conviction rates of wildlife offenders.

Mozambique has developed comprehensive policies and laws for the protection, conservation and sustainable use of wildlife resources, with engagement of a wide range of stakeholders, including local communities and the private sector. During the last 15 years the main legislation governing wildlife and conservation areas management is the Forest and Wildlife Law1 and its regulation. However, this law is inadequate to combat wildlife crimes. Offenses against iconic and protected wildlife species are punishable only by fines, which are not high enough to discourage the crime. Additionally, the enforcement of the law is constrained by limited number of enforcement agents, limited patrolling equipment, limited incentives and widespread corruption. The increasing level of organized crime is also threatening the survival of protected wildlife species. The Conservation Areas Law2 was enacted in 2014 and offers a great opportunity to combat wildlife crime as it provides for heavy fines and imprisonment of up to 12 years for offenses against protected wildlife species. However, the enforcement of this law is constrained by the lack of its regulations. Mozambique has ratified the most relevant international conventions for the conservation of wildlife and their habitats and has, to a large extent, adapted domestic legislation to incorporate the provisions of the conventions. However, weak enforcement of domestic legislation undermines the fulfilment of the obligations of the country associated with the ratification of the conventions.

Ethiopia is committed to wildlife conservation and has in place a wildlife policy and strategy that guides the administration of the wildlife sector. This policy is translated into legislation for purposes of making its provisions enforceable. There is legislation that establishes the institutional framework of the wildlife sector and legislation that regulates the wildlife sector. The wildlife legislation has strong provisions that address wildlife crime and wildlife trafficking but it also has gaps that need to be sealed in order to successfully administer and adjudicate over wildlife cases. Ethiopia is quite strong in complying with international standards that address wildlife crime including standards on reduction of wildlife trade, fighting of organized criminal groups, curbing money laundering and fighting corruption. The effectiveness of the legislation cannot be accurately gauged as there is lack of consistent and reliable data on wildlife cases.

Uganda has a very strong wildlife policy and the government is committed towards wildlife conservation and protection and fighting wildlife crime. Uganda is a party to various international conventions that provide for the conservation in wildlife, regulation of trade in wildlife and wildlife products, proper law enforcement and anti‐corruption initiatives. Being a party to these instruments demonstrates Uganda’s commitment to meet international standards in protection of wildlife and reduction of wildlife crime in the country. However, even with a strong policy and commitment to international standards, wildlife crime still occurs in Uganda that is a serious threat to the survival of some key iconic species in the country. One of the reasons is that the wildlife legislation and other laws do not reflect the standards set in the policy or the international requirements. Uganda is working towards review of its laws to catch up with its policies and international standards and hopefully this will address the gap and weaknesses in the wildlife legislation.

In recent years, many countries have significantly revised their existing legislation or adopted new legal frameworks for the protection and management of wildlife. This study assesses the current status of national wildlife laws around the world, with a particular emphasis on legal innovations that have emerged over the last decade. The study focuses on domestic legislation, but also briefly examines the main features of international wildlife treaties, highlighting the linkages between global, national and local instruments. While retaining many of the basic elements of earlier legislation, recent laws address new issues and reflect new strategies for wildlife protection and management. They provide for better protection of biodiversity, deal with broader threats to wildlife within and outside protected areas, place clearer emphasis on management planning, pay more attention to sociocultural dimensions of wildlife management, enhance the involvement of affected persons and stakeholders in decision-making, and allow greater scope for local communities to participate in the benefits of wildlife use.