Knives out for Kgosi Sekai
Innocent Selatlhwa | Monday March 16, 2026 06:00
Matlotlakgosi mophato (regiment), which Kgosikgolo Kgafela Kgafela II’s son, Matshego Kgafela, belongs to, has submitted a petition outlining what they term ongoing accountability concerns relating to Sekai's actions, omissions, and leadership approach in the administration of matters affecting the morafe.
The petition, which they state is submitted in the interests of transparency, lawful governance, customary accountability, unity, and the protection of the collective interests of the Bakgatla ba Kgafela, was addressed to the District Commissioner.
“In the interest of restoring normalcy and harmony, the regiment has deliberated on certain matters of concern which we respectfully wish to present for the attention and consideration of our Tribal Leaders; Kgosi Kgolo, Kgosi Bana Sekai and our Fathers of mophato wa Mangana, so that they may be addressed constructively and timeously,” they state. The petition was also submitted to the District Commissioner’s office in Mochudi.
According to the regiment, Kgosi Sekai has not implemented or publicly recognised the pronouncement by Kgafela II appointing Kgosi Matshego Kgafela in Moruleng. This situation, they state, creates uncertainty regarding legitimate authority; appears inconsistent with customary administrative practice; and undermines clarity within the structures established by Kgafela.
“No explanation has been provided to the morafe, nor has clarification been sought from Kgosi Kgolo. As the regiment of Kgosi Matshego, we respectfully request clarity so that both we and the morafe may understand and accord appropriate recognition,” they state.
They also state that Kgosi Sekai does not appear to recognise Kgosana Lebogang Maname in his role as Kgosana and Spokesperson for the Royal Family. “The continued use of language perceived as dismissive or demeaning, undermines customary respect, weakens the integrity of royal institutions, and creates confusion regarding official communication channels,” they state.
Matlotlakgosi wants clarification as to why Kgosi Sekai publicly asserts that there is no spokesperson in Sekgatla, rather than engaging Kgosi Kgolo directly on the matter. They argue Kgosana Maname has consistently assisted in communicating matters affecting Kgosi Kgolo to the Morafe, and this role is widely recognised.
The regiment further indicates that Royal Uncles remain absent from Kgotla and tribal gatherings, without explanation or visible efforts toward reconciliation.
“We respectfully request clarity on any steps being taken to restore customary consultation and efforts toward reconciliation and unity. Royal Uncles and their families lead several regiments, and their participation is vital for harmony, peace, and effective Morafe engagement,” they state.
Kgosi Sekai is also accused of not having accounted to the Morafe regarding the use of communal property, including gum poles from Leobo. They state that to date, there has been no financial disclosure on the disposal. There is concern that some were taken for personal gain. They insist that there was no reporting to the Morafe and no clear indication of community benefit. “This absence of information raises serious fiduciary and governance concerns,” they state.
The regent further laments that there are no regular updates provided to the Morafe regarding the welfare of Kgosi Kgolo, nor evidence of active mobilisation of the Morafe to support him.
Additionally, they complain that Morafe has not been adequately briefed on court cases in Moruleng relating to disputes over Bogosi. “We respectfully request clarity on what efforts Kgosi Sekai has made, as a Royal Uncle, to address opposition to Kgosi Kgolo,” they wrote.
Kgosi Sekai is also accused of not having disclosed the basis, process, or authority relied upon in the suspension and removal of Kgosi Ramono in Moruleng. This lack of public update to Morafe by Kgosi Sekai, they state, has created uncertainty and eroded confidence.
The regent also states there has been no accounting regarding branding of Bakgatla cattle, management of unbranded calves, and measures to prevent loss or misuse. They said reports suggesting that some Masama cattle are being taken to private kraals raise serious asset-governance concerns.
Matlotlakgosi also requests clarity on the affairs of Bakgatla Trusts in Mochudi, including the number of trusts and Morafe representation, their mandates and functions, benefits accruing to the Morafe, processes and proceeds from the sale of wild animals, and the status of animals returned.
“We further request confirmation on whether Kgosi Kgolo has been briefed and when the Morafe will receive updates,” they state.
The regiment also states that there are ongoing concerns that cases brought before the Kgotla are delayed without explanation and handled inconsistently. They also state they are concerned by reports that some decisions are overturned without due process, occasionally resulting in personal benefit.
The regiment further requests information on the preparations being made for Kgosi Kgolo's return to Botswana and guidance on when the Morafe will be formally engaged to prepare accordingly.
In a follow-up to the petition, the regiment wrote a letter to Kgosi Bana Sekai lamenting that they received no acknowledgement or substantive response regarding the matter raised. They gave him an ultimatum to respond before 10 March 2026, failing which they would then escalate the matter to the District Commissioner of Kgatleng.
Meanwhile, Kgosi Sekai would not entertain questions in relation to the petition. “I do not lead Matlotlakgosi, I lead Bakgatla. I do not account to Matlotlakgosi, I account to Bakgatla, whom I lead as their Kgosi,” he responded to Mmegi enquiries.