BOTSWANA: High Profile Trial Could Open Can of Worms

• by Ephraim Nsingo (gaborone)
• Tuesday, February 24, 2009
• Inter Press Service

Nchindo and his co-accused are charged with, among other things, defrauding the Botswana government of title to land in Gaborone and of allegedly telling Mogae that the Tourism Development Consortium was set up as a vehicle through which Debswana intended to contribute to the diversification of the Botswana economy.

It later turned out that the company did not exist. Nchindo is also alleged to have stolen $100,000 from Debswana during his stint as managing director.

Nchindo, who was axed in 2004 after allegedly falling out with his once-close friend Mogae, is standing trial on 36 counts of corruption. In the dock with him are his son Garvas Nchindo, Joseph Malope Matome, Jacob Dommy Sesinyi, Golconda Holdings (PVT) LTD and Tourism Development Consortium (PVT) Ltd.

The list of names submitted in court as witnesses has ensnared the who’s who of Botswana politics: President, Lt. Gen. Seretse Khama Ian Khama, his predecessor Festus Mogae, vice president Mompati Merafhe, foreign affairs minister Phandu Skelemani, minister of presidential affairs and public administration, Daniel Kwelagobe and his counterpart in the minerals, energy and water resources portfolio Ponatshego Kedikilwe.

The Chairperson of De Beers, Nicky Oppenheimer, is also expected to give evidence. De Beers jointly owns diamond firm Debswana with the government of Botswana.

As if the array of witnesses were not thrilling enough to maintain public interest, the case took a dramatic twist on Feb. 17 when the prosecution revealed that a statement from a key state witness, Oppenheimer, had gone missing.

'The disappearance of the statement is one of the many shenanigans that have been happening behind the scenes. Already, the case has caused some friction in the ruling party, and there are fears, if not well handled, it may have effects even on preparations for the elections,' a source in the ruling BDP told IPS. General elections are scheduled for October.

But it’s a clash of a different kind that’s been providing the drama in court. The Directorate of Public Prosecutions (DPP) and the defense lawyers have been squaring off over access to testimony from key witnesses. The defense team of advocate Peter Hodes, Lawrence Khupe and Parks Tafa has demanded statements from former president Mogae and members of his cabinet. They also want to interview witnesses and establish what they will say when the trial gets underway. The DPP has been unyielding to that request.

'We maintain that those (statements) taken have been availed and those not, have not been availed,' the prosecution responded to a defense complaint that their case was being prejudiced by delays in securing statements.

'Further, our position remains that when statements are eventually obtained from members of the Mogae Cabinet, who have not submitted them, such will be made available to the defense. We therefore wonder if the prosecution can avail statements it does not currently have; and whether the impatience of the defense to get a slice of the Mogae Cabinet should undermine the burden of proof incumbent upon the prosecution,' retorted senior state counsel, Kgosietsile Ngakaagae.

The defense insisted that the 'failure to timeously furnish these statements... constitutes a significant inroad into the constitutional right of the accused to a fair trial'.

'Why were statements not taken from all the members of the Mogae Cabinet? The answer is simple: It is not a requirement,' snapped Ngakaagae pointing out that a witness should not be forced to make a statement. The DPP maintains that Khama and Merafhe could not make statements but did not give reasons.

But an official in the DPP told IPS that the matter had become 'a bit complicated', as it could be used by some to advance a political agenda.

'The disappearance of a document from the Directorate of Corruption and Economic Crime (DCEC) which had Oppenheimer's statement is just a small tip of the bigger picture. There are many complications because of the politicking involved,' said our source.

Perhaps more telling was the prosecutor’s explanation that 'It is incorrect to say they (the defense) should be totally supplied with everything. Some information is state secrets on economy and security so cannot be brought before the court.'

The case resumes in the Village Magistrate's Court in Gaborone on Feb. 26. It has caused ructions within the top echelons of the ruling Botswana Democratic Party (BDP). The senior politicians’ that have been drawn into the saga belong to two rival factions.

© Inter Press Service (2009) — All Rights ReservedOriginal source: Inter Press Service

Where next?

Advertisement