Ex-BDF officer loses P5m battle against Chinese construction giant
Mpho Mokwape | Wednesday November 5, 2025 06:00
Justice Reuben Lekorwe of the Lobatse High Court dismissed the case last week, ruling that the former officer, who later worked as a security adviser for the company after it was blaklisted on allegations of national security threat by DIS, failed to prove on a balance of evidence that such a promise ever existed.
'There was no written contract to ascertain that there was ever such an agreement, and the plaintiff failed to prove that there was a verbal agreement to that effect; therefore, the court can only conclude that such a promise never existed,' the judge said.
According to the judgment, Peke was hired in February 2019 after leaving the army and was paid P20,000 per month. His written contract said he would receive a 'one-time bonus' if he solved a 'serious security challenge' faced by the company.
He had told the court that the company was blacklisted from government projects in 2018 after being labelled a security threat and said he was brought in to rectify the problem, negotiating with government officials to clear the company’s name.
'The company’s then-managing director, Cui Wanglin, promised me a P5 million reward if the delisting succeeded,' he had argued.
The plaintiff stated that he met with senior security officials, including the Director General of DIS, Peter Magosi, and that the blacklisting was lifted in October 2020. He further claimed that he then demanded his bonus, but the company refused to pay, citing financial struggles.
Cui, however, denied ever promising P5 million. He told the court that whilst the plaintiff was helpful, the bonus clause referred to future problems, not the existing blacklisting. He also said that other people, including a retired army brigadier, played a part in resolving the issue.
However, Justice Lekorwe dismissed Peke, and in his judgment, he said the contract language was too vague and that the clause about a 'security challenge' was written in general terms.
“The clause was clearly in contemplation of a future event. The plaintiff’s supposed success came from his 'access to public officers' rather than special security expertise. Monetising such access was ethically questionable. Public officers should be freely accessible to promote public trust. Subjects must not have to pay for access,” Justice Lekorwe warned.
He concluded that the plaintiff did not prove the existence of a P5 million promise and dismissed the case.
The judge also said that even though the company benefited from the blacklisting reversal, it could not claim costs because it was 'complicit, if not the initiator, of the stain' that tainted the arrangement and ordered that both parties pay their own legal costs.