Thieves � Dibotelo calls suspended judges
Oarabile Mosikare | Friday September 18, 2015 18:00
In his answering affidavit to the urgent application by the quartet before the Lobatse High Court, Dibotelo said the point that the suspended judges received allowances not due to them was an act of theft.
“That act prima facie constitutes an act of theft. The fact that there may have been lapses on their part in the past does not excuse the applicants,” writes Dibotelo.
President Ian Khama suspended the four judges: Key Dingake, Modiri Letsididi, Mercy Garekwe and Ranier Busang, and appointed a tribunal to inquire into their conduct.
Last week the four filed an urgent application to interdict the sitting of the tribunal. They also want their suspensions set aside. The case was postponed yesterday to September 28 by Justice Tebogo Tau to enable the parties to exchange documents. The applicants shall file their replying affidavits on September 22. They will also exchange heads of arguments on September 24.
In his affidavit dated September 16, the CJ said it is also immaterial whether or not they want to refund the money to the government. He said the interim internal audit report revealed that Dingake had wrongfully received P200,467.95 over a period of about three years. Letsididi had wrongly received P494,323.40 over a period of about eight years while Garekwe had wrongfully received P123,281.10 over a period of about two years.
Busang had wrongfully received P105,468.70 over a period of about two years. The total for the four applicants was P923,543.20. “I am advised that the attempt by the two judges who are former Registrars of the High Court, to trivialise the possible unlawful conversion of close to one million Pula by describing it as a mere administrative matter is most unfortunate and brings into question their motive and credibility as witnesses,” writes Dibotelo.
Dibotelo was referring to Justices Godfrey Nthomiwa and Gaolapelwe Ketlogetswe who had deposed confirmatory affidavits in support of their suspended colleagues. “It is perhaps proper at this stage to state that both Justices Nthomiwa and Ketlogetswe have signed a petition calling for my impeachment as Chief Justice and have made defamatory statements concerning my person. It has since come to my attention that some of the signatures in the petition may not be of those they purport to be. I am yet however to establish the truthfulness of this allegation, and if true act on it. The attempt by the two Justices to trivialise the unlawful conversion of close to one million Pula and describe it as a mere administrative matter is shocking to say the least,” he said.
Dibotelo stated that the applicants’ ignorance is surprising and self-serving.
“Applicants are judicial officers who do not require to be reminded of their obligations, rights and entitlement. In accepting their employment and the terms therein, none of them has ever stated that they did not understand their terms of engagement.”
The CJ disputed Dingake’s assertion that the wrongful receiving of the housing allowance was a mere administrative lapse.
“It was the view of the JSC that the issue was a serious one, potentially involving theft by conversion and therefore one warranting investigation by the police. It is for the police investigation to establish whether or not a criminal act was committed. It is surprising that the applicants are pleading ignorance when they knew that as part of their employment contract, they were only entitled to one of the two; an institutional house or a housing allowance.”
He continued: “The fact that they would have preferred special treatment does not make my action unlawful, the suggestion that I be impeached for doing my job as Chief Justice was gravest form of contempt, defamation and rebellion. Worse, the applicants attempt to rally all judges around their cause was meant to undermine the office of the Chief Justice and bring disrepute and dishonour to it.”
He continued: “The contention that the applicants did not aid the publicity of the joint letter of 12th August 2015 is denied by reason that they published it to at least other judges. The Mmegi newspaper carried excerpts from the applicants’ joint defamatory letter… a day after the applicants delivered their letter to my office. The coincidence was shocking.”
While acknowledging the petition of August 17, 2015, Dibotelo said he had no knowledge of how many High Court judges actually signed it. “The so called petition is the gravest form of defamation and contempt I have ever been subjected to in all the years that I have practised law which stems over 40 years; I reserve my rights in this respect.”
He said that no one is above the law and if other judges are found to have unduly benefited, the law will take its course. He added that damage to the judiciary would have been occasioned by an attempt to conceal this wrongdoing. He also denied that there is reduction of benefits saying Dingake is exaggerating the temporary non-use of the official vehicle.
“It is admitted that they may create minor temporary inconvenience, but to the extent that it was a prudent use of scarce resources, one cannot interpret it as a reduction of benefits. Obviously those appointed to act for the interim period will need to use the vehicles more than the applicants who temporarily are excused from performing of any official judicial functions.”