Majaga holds no grudges against complainant
Lesedi Mkhutshwa | Friday March 26, 2021 16:14
This was after the Botswana Democratic Party (BDP) parliamentarian was acquitted and discharged from defilement charges after the Magistrate ruled that the complainant in the matter had not presented a credible case.
Majaga had pleaded not guilty to the charges in which the State alleged that the MP defiled the under-aged girl (who cannot be named for legal reasons) between September 2019 and May 2020, at Malelejwe cattle post, a settlement on the outskirts of Nata in the Central District.
In an interview with Mmegi, Majaga’s attorney, Mishingo Jeremiah said his client does not hold a grudge against the complainant.
According to Jeremiah, his client believes the case was orchestrated by his detractors, and that the young lady was just “used”. He added: ‘‘As you saw in the judgement, there were so many things that raised suspicion in this case.
He was hurriedly arrested, detained and prosecuted before the investigations could be completed. DNA tests were requested while the case had already been registered.’’ He further said there was another suspect, a certain Kabelo, who the evidence showed that he lived with the complainant at his house and had a sexual relationship with her.
He also stated that while the investigators claimed that a DNA test was done for Kabelo, which concluded that he was also not the father of the child, no other action was taken against Kabelo as he was not arrested, detained nor prosecuted like Majaga.
Therefore, he said that Majaga felt targeted as he is a public figure whereas Kabelo, an ordinary citizen, is free. Jeremiah also shared that rights groups were mistaken or ill-informed in their approach when they were effectively calling for Majaga to step aside from his parliamentary duties.
He explained: ‘‘There is no stepping aside in our law for legislators. You are voted for a fixed term in which your service is required. What is there is to resign from your seat?’’ He said Majaga believed in his innocence, and therefore, relinquishing his seat was not an option.
The attorney further said the case did not affect his client’s ability to perform his duties and he had now been vindicated by the court. He said that it was wrong for the rights groups to have seemed to have convicted him before he was even trialed.
Against all the odds, he said that Majaga was very thankful to all the people who stood and supported him, especially when “many were demonising him and convicting him in the courts of public opinion”. Jeremiah was asked if Majaga was still comfortable in being part of the ruling party when he felt that there was a hidden agenda against him.
The defence attorney responded that Majaga was still comfortable in the BDP and if he was not, he would have long left. He added that his duty was to the people of Nata/Gweta, and he will continue to serve them well, to the best of his ability. Above all, Jeremiah stated that Majaga was relieved that he had finally cleared his name.