Former BONU leaders 'fight' for way back in
Innocent Selatlhwa | Wednesday July 30, 2025 06:00
Former BONU president Obonolo Rahube and three others have through attorney Lesedi Rammika called on the BIEC to make an undertaking that it will not proceed with progressing preparations for elections and further proceed to the holding of elections whilst a review application is lodged before court.
BIEC had communicated in letters dated July 6, 2025, rejecting manifestos and declining intentions of Rahube, M V Nsagwa, Aobakwe Lesolame, and Kenneth Moabi Matlakele to contest in the upcoming BONU elections.
They now intend to lodge a review application against the interpretation adopted by this year’s BONU Independent Electoral Commission in respect to Article 12.1.2. It states that “The Central Executive Committee shall hold office for a period of three years and every member shall have a limited term of office of two consecutive terms.' They are of the view that the interpretation falls to be irrational and unlawful. “The interpretation goes against practice and precedence of limiting members only to a series of 'consecutive terms' in so far as returning nominees are concerned; The interpretation goes against the spirit of the provision and its intent and purpose; The interpretation does not give a narrow interpretation to a limiting provision as per general rules of interpretation; All in all, the new interpretation takes away members right to parity of treatment without justification,” Rammika wrote.
They have now pleaded with the BIEC to take an undertaking that it will not proceed with progressing preparations for elections and further proceed to the holding of elections while a review application is lodged before court. The review application, they state shall be filed on or before July 30, 2025.
“Your undertaking should be delivered on or before end of day on the 28th of July 2025. Failure to deliver the undertaking will compel ours to seek for urgent interim relief pending the review,” they wrote.
In an earlier letter written by Lesolame to the BIEC, every word in such a document must be construed to have a meaning. “For instance, the Constitution could have simply been written to say every member shall have a limited term of office of 'two terms'. This would have been in alignment with the position of the reasons given me for rejection,” he wrote.
Further, Lesolame is of the view that they cannot ignore the introduction of the term 'consecutive' and its impact in the meaning of the Article, stating that the intention is to limit consecutive terms.
“The members of the union clearly wish only to limit the CEC from holding office indefinitely without other members having opportunity to rotate into the executive positions. This is beneficial in avoiding corruption risk, especially as linked to familiarity of holding a position. I wish to also direct your considerations to the fact that a union is a voluntary association where interpretations that favour members' freedom of choice and open competition should be favoured to the exclusion of those that narrow or limit members' voting choice,” he stated.
In response to Lesolame and the others who had appealed, the Chief Electoral Officer Lebalang Smuts said that after consulting for legal opinion concerning the cited article, the committee did not find any indication within the clause or elsewhere in the constitution that a member may return (following completion of two consecutive terms) after a break and no mechanism to reset or renew the 'limited term'. “The committee would like to state that you are not denied the chance to contest for elections but the committee is working within the constitution parameters which is the guiding tool. With all the above stated, the committee has taken a decision to stand with its initial resolution of declining your intention to contest for the 2025 elections,” he stated.