Former Railways legal head loses P876k compensation bid
Mpho Mokwape | Wednesday October 15, 2025 06:00
Judge President Modiri Letsididi recently ruled that the dismissal was lawful and that the litigant had failed to prove his entitlement to any of the allowances he claimed.
'The dismissal was lawful and about the claim, as far as the evidence submitted by the organisation, you have never acted in the new position,' Justice Letsididi said.
'I accept that you had at some point demanded that you be paid the allowance, but that is not in itself sufficient proof that you acted in the position and your claim, for what it is worth, was an allegation that you made but which you failed to substantiate with clear evidence.'
Mokhurutshe had taken Botswana Railways to court after his employment was terminated on December 20, 2017.
He had served as the organisation’s Corporate Legal Manager from October 19, 2009, and in his claim, he sought damages amounting to P876,300.25.
The sum included compensation for unlawful dismissal at P681,192, a responsibility allowance of P98,328.25, and an acting allowance of P96,780, with interest and legal costs.
The dispute arose after Mokhurutshe was accused of including confidential 'in-camera' minutes in a board pack that was distributed to members of the board following a meeting on November 6, 2017.
According to the judgment, a letter dated November 20, 2017, from the Chief Executive Officer asked Mokhurutshe to explain why disciplinary action should not be taken against him.
In his response, Mokhurutshe admitted that there had been a lapse but claimed the inclusion of the confidential material had happened without his instruction and during his absence. He reportedly also apologised and undertook to be more careful in the future.
Despite the apology and assurance, on November 21, 2017, Mokhurutshe was formally charged with disclosing confidential information, and a disciplinary hearing was held on December 11, 2017, after which he was dismissed.
He then challenged both the process and the outcome of the hearing.
In his filings, he argued that he was not given enough information to prepare for his defence and that the proceedings did not follow company policy, which required an investigation and appointment of an initiator.
Judge Letsididi, however, found that Mokhurutshe had been given enough information to understand the charge and prepare for the hearing.
He noted that Mokhurutshe had responded to the show-cause letter without asking for clarification and that the charge was clearly linked to the disclosure of in-camera minutes concerning the former CEO’s vehicle benefits and the recruitment of a Finance Director.
'You responded to the letter without asking for clarification, and it is clear that you knew what it was about and what the charge was clearly about,' Letsididi said.
Whilst Mokhurutshe claimed that the recruitment issue was not confidential, he admitted during the hearing that the CEO’s vehicle benefits were an in-camera matter.
Justice Letsididi concluded that the confidential information had, in fact, been included in the board pack, and although Mokhurutshe was not present when it was distributed, he was responsible for ensuring the integrity of the documents.
The judge president added that Mokhurutshe’s defence, blaming the CEO’s assistant, was not acceptable as he was in charge of board secretarial duties.
'The disclosure was serious misconduct and I agree with the disciplinary hearing’s conclusion that summary dismissal was appropriate, given the nature of the breach and its impact on the trust relationship between employer and employee,' Letsididi said.
On the issue of the responsibility and acting allowances, the judge found that Mokhurutshe failed to prove that he was formally appointed to perform higher duties or take over another employee’s job.
According to the General Conditions of Service, such allowances are only paid when a formal appointment is made.
Evidence from Botswana Railways’ witnesses showed that senior staff, including Mokhurutshe, were sometimes asked to assist subsidiaries without being paid extra.
Therefore, Justice Letsididi said there was no proof that Mokhurutshe had acted in a higher position or had been formally assigned such responsibilities.
'You premised this claim on a position that was created when Botswana Railways restructured job positions within its organisation.
'However, what is clear from the testimony of their witnesses is that the restructuring policy had not been implemented, and there had not been an appointment to the newly created post.
'You failed to lead evidence to contradict this fact,' he explained.
The judge ruled that Mokhurutshe’s dismissal was lawful and that he was not entitled to any of the payments he claimed, and the lawsuit was dismissed with costs awarded to Botswana Railways.