DIS officers revisit contempt against Magosi, Macholo
Mpho Mokwape | Monday November 3, 2025 06:40
The development marks a major setback for the two directors, who had previously managed to block their arrest as the court agreed with them that they had not served the contempt applications individually.
They had argued that the High Court’s contempt of court judgment, issued in August 2025, should not be enforced as they were not served individually, and also that they were still pursuing appeal processes.
However, with the CoA now striking out their bid for a late appeal, and also granting the application for withdrawal, the employees say the matter is ‘squarely back before the High Court for enforcement, where they intend to revisit the contempt of court application without further delay if the duo fail to comply.
“This decision confirms what we have been saying all along, that the applicants have no valid appeal before any court. They have been using court procedures as a shield from accountability. Now that the CoA has shut that door, they must comply with the law,” said the officers.
The contempt order, issued by Justice Zein Kebonang, directed that Magosi and Macholo be imprisoned until they complied with a previous High Court ruling requiring payment of long-outstanding salary backpays owed to DIS employees.
The original judgment, delivered in June 2024, found that the directors had failed to implement Directive No. 6 of 2008 and related circulars governing progression and backpay for C-Band public officers.
A follow-up order in December 2024 reaffirmed that obligation, yet to date, the employees claim, no meaningful compliance has occurred. In their earlier application to avoid arrest, Magosi and Macholo argued that jailing them would violate their constitutional rights to liberty and potentially threaten national security.
They maintained that, as senior government officials and presidential appointees, their imprisonment could disrupt public administration. “As Presidential appointees holding key government positions, our continued freedom is essential to the functioning of the state,” they had argued.
Their officers, through their legal representative, Charles Batsalelwang of Collins Chilisa Consultants, however, fiercely opposed the application, describing the claims are misleading, self-serving, and legally unfounded.
“The idea that national security will collapse because a director is held accountable is both wrong and disrespectful to the many officers who keep government running daily,” argued the employees in their affidavit.
The employees, Pelotshweu Masilomangwe and 406 others, insisted that the High Court’s orders were clear and enforceable, directing payment of salaries lawfully due under the long-standing C-Band progression framework.
They also refuted the directors’ claim that they were not personally served with the orders, arguing that service on their lawyers was legally sufficient and that the directors had full knowledge of the orders.
“The law is clear, once you are aware of a court order, you are bound to obey it, whether it was personally handed to you or not,” said the aggrieved officers.
On claims by Magosi and Macholo that public services and national security would be compromised by their arrest, the employees responded by saying that this argument is false and exaggerated.
They argued that the institutions the applicants lead are not dependent on one individual and that there are deputies and structures in place to ensure continuity.
The employees also challenged claims that the court orders were vague or unenforceable, insisting that the judgments clearly outlined what the applicants were supposed to do by paying the employees their outstanding salaries.
Batsalelwang pointed out that the court is not required to give step-by-step instructions on how to do that, they say. It is up to the applicants to follow the law and comply in good faith.
In the end, the contempt of court order was struck out because the judge found out that the two top government officials were not served individually; therefore, they could not be arrested.
With the CoA’s dismissal, the employees now want the two directors to comply or be ready for a fresh contempt order, warning that further delays would deepen the injustice.
“Justice delayed is justice denied,” Batsalelwang emphasized. “Many of these officers have gone over a decade without receiving what they are lawfully owed. The time for excuses is over,” said the officers.
If the contempt order is filed and granted, Magosi and Macholo could be imprisoned until they comply with the court’s directive to pay the affected DIS officers.