No room for perjury

The Monitor Editor | Wednesday July 9, 2025 12:40

It seems some government accounting officers, sworn to tell 'the truth, the whole truth, and nothing else but the truth' before Almighty God, may have deliberately lied during the committee’s vital work. If proven, this is not merely unprofessional; it is perjury, a serious criminal offence and it strikes at the very heart of responsible government.

The PAC’s role is fundamental. After each financial year, it painstakingly examines how public money, our money, has been spent. Accounting officers are summoned, take a solemn oath, and are expected to provide truthful, complete answers. This process relies entirely on trust and honesty. Without it, the committee’s ability to uncover waste, inefficiency, or even corruption is crippled. When officers allegedly withhold critical information or give knowingly false testimony under oath, they sabotage this crucial democratic safeguard. They treat Parliament, and by extension the people, with contempt.

The PAC’s reported consideration of perjury charges is therefore not only understandable but necessary. Lying under oath cannot be brushed aside as a minor indiscretion. As the source rightly highlighted, it is an attack on the foundation of the legal and parliamentary system. The oath taken before the PAC carries immense weight. It exists precisely to ensure the gravity of the occasion is understood and to compel truthfulness. To violate that oath knowingly is a profound betrayal of public office and public trust. It suggests a belief that powerful officials are somehow above the law, immune from the consequences ordinary citizens would face for such an act.

Whilst PAC Chairperson Taolo Lucas rightly states that final decisions await the completion of their work, the committee’s resolve must be unwavering. The message sent must be crystal clear: misleading Parliament, especially under oath, will have severe repercussions. Potential perjury charges are not about playing 'gotcha'; they are about upholding the integrity of the entire system of financial oversight and accountability. If officers believe they can lie without consequence, the PAC’s work becomes meaningless, and public confidence in government spending plummets further.

This situation also raises a worrying question noted by the source: do some accounting officers truly grasp the seriousness of perjury? If so, this points to a dangerous culture of impunity. If not, it highlights a critical gap in understanding the solemn duties and legal obligations inherent in their positions. Training and clear communication about the severe legal and professional consequences of misleading Parliament are essential.

The PAC must follow through. Thoroughly document the alleged falsehoods, allow due process, but if perjury is evident, prosecute. To do less is to signal that truthfulness before Parliament is optional. Botswana deserves better. Public scrutiny of state finances depends entirely on truthful testimony. Those entrusted with managing the nation's coffers must be held to the highest standard of honesty, especially when sworn before a committee of the people’s representatives.