This study tests the relevance of the theory of rights to the city in asking how migrants go about
claiming rights to the city of Francistown, Botswana despite a highly restrictive immigration
regime and general levels of xenophobia. The theory of rights, my theoretical framework
proposed by Lefebvre (in Mitchell 2003), states that all urban dwellers, regardless of their legal
status, have an equal right to the city due to the mere fact that they work towards its
development. This is a normative position that has questionable practicability in the hostile
context of Francistown where people face the threat of deportation by government officials.
Nonetheless, Zimbabweans living there illegally find ways to claim rights. This thesis explores
how they do that and from whom they claim.
Based on 29 semi-structured qualitative interviews with migrants and officials conducted in
Gaborone and Francistown from the 7th October 2011- 29th November 2011, I argue that there
are great disjunctures between popular opinions of a hostile Francistown and street level practice.
While policy remains exclusionary, in practice Francistown does not offer newcomers great
formal restrictions. Similarly, while xenophobia remains strong at an abstract level, this rarely
translates into objective obstacles. By understanding that the environment of Francistown is
accommodating and operates on the basis of botho (compassion), one can then comprehend the
rights being accessed and claimed by migrants and that to some extent, they are aided by
Botswana government officials. Moreover, it is evident that the rights migrant seeks and
strategies they use are not in accordance with the theory of rights to the city. Indeed, the
emphasis on formal mechanisms of claiming rights as stipulated by Lefebvre works against
undocumented migrants. In addition to this, it is clear that the informal economy needs to exist
for it highly compliments undocumented migrants claiming strategies and way of life. Therefore
my finings have important theoretical implications for how we understand rights and policy
lessons for organisations like UNHABITAT who have adopted the language of rights without
understanding how rights are being negotiated and claimed from the bottom up.