Butale takes BPF NEC to court yet again
Innocent Selatlhwa | Monday August 21, 2023 06:00
The case comes shortly after Butale failed to convince Justice Zein Kebonang of the Gaborone High Court that he was wrongfully suspended and expelled. Butale is not about to give up on his presidency as he had already filed an appeal with the country’s apex Court of Appeal.
He has also switched attorneys on the current matter being represented by Kole Law Practice. In his all other matters, Butale was represented by Rammika and Tafa Attorneys. In the current matter, Butale is the solo applicant in the matter while the BPF, its national executive committee (NEC), and Mephato Reatile are first to third respondents.
Butale is seeking an order to review and set aside his suspension and expulsion from the party. Butale alleges that these actions were taken without proper jurisdictional facts, in bad faith, and in violation of natural justice.
The dispute stems from a series of events that began at the party's congress held on April 29-30, 2023, during which it was resolved that Butale and the NEC should continue in office and lead the party into the 2024 General Election. However, internal disagreements within the party escalated and led to legal disputes, with Butale's presidency being a central point of contention.
Butale's suspension was purportedly communicated by a letter dated July 4, 2023, authored by the supposed secretary of BPF's disciplinary committee, Barulaganye Letang.
The letter cited various alleged breaches and violations committed by Butale. However, Butale contests the legitimacy of this suspension, claiming that the disciplinary committee never received any complaints from the Youth League or any other forum within the BPF. As evidence, he provides letters from the disciplinary committee itself and the Youth League distancing themselves from any complaints. Furthermore, Butale argues that the alleged meeting of the disciplinary committee on July 13, 2023, which recommended his expulsion to the NEC, never took place.
He alleges that the vice-chairperson of the disciplinary committee, who would have convened such a meeting, confirmed that no such a meeting occurred. This raises questions about the credibility of the expulsion process. “By custom the disciplinary committee of the BPF has always been convened by its chairperson. On the 4th July 2023 the chairperson of this committee was Boitshwarelo Mopedi.
He advices me that he never convened any meeting to discuss my suspension on the date in question or at all. Even if someone else would have convened any such meeting, he would have been entitled not only to chair it but at the very least, to attend and participate in it. The disciplinary committee simply was never seized with the matter that culminated with my purported suspension,” Butale stated. According to Butale, only members of the disciplinary committee and the Youth League extant at the time can confirm or contend with this position. He emphasises that Mopedi was an incumbent member of the BPF’s disciplinary committee at the material time.
“He has confirmed to me that the disciplinary committee never received any complaint against me from the Youth League and that they never purported to discipline me.
On the basis of the foregoing, in purporting to suspend me, the BPF clearly acted without the necessary jurisdictional fact that could have predicated the trigger of any disciplinary power it assumed to exercise under the circumstances,” he states. Butale's attorney, Kole Kole also argues that his suspension and expulsion were carried out without affording him the opportunity to defend himself, thereby violating natural justice.
His suspension, as well as the subsequent expulsion, would have significant implications for his rights and entitlements within the party, as detailed in the party's constitution. Kole assert that Butale's suspension and expulsion are null and void, either due to a lack of jurisdictional facts, bad faith, or violations of natural justice. Butale's legal team has submitted affidavits and documentary evidence to support these claims. Butale’s case is