High Court endorses Red Cross AGM
Tsaone Basimanebotlhe | Friday December 18, 2015 16:38
The case, which was brought on urgency, was heard on Wednesday before Justice Michael Mothobi.
The AGM will be held this weekend in Gaborone and is expected among other things to elect a new national executive council.
The applicant, Titus Makosha had stated that he only learnt of the AGM a few days ago and that only two out of eight branches had knowledge about the meeting.
Makosha is the former full-time employee of the Society by virtue of being an elected deputy secretary general.
When delivering the ruling, Justice Mothobi said there is no urgency on the matter since the applicant, Makosha had failed to clearly state the dates in which they were informed of the AGM. “The respondents had demonstrated that the savingram that was informing all Botswana Red Cross Society branches had been issued in September.
“Therefore urgency in this case becomes self-created. This case will follow the normal case process but only the 2nd respondent (Mabel Rammekwa) and the third respondent (Mildred Koketso) should be cited.
The applicant has failed to prove the legality of the case against 1st respondent (Botswana Red Cross Society),” Mothobi said.
He ordered that the applicant pay the costs of the application. Earlier, Makosha’s attorney, Esiah Letlole told the court that they want to interdict and restrain Rammekwa and Koketso from entering Red Cross Society offices pending the ongoing investigations by the Directorate on Corruption and Economic Crimes (DCEC). They feared that the two would interfere with DCEC investigations.
He said his client had the right to be informed two months prior to the AGM elections because he is Red Cross Society life member.
Meanwhile, the respondent’s attorney Bonolo Magora said the applicants did not tell his attorney the truth since the memo was issued to all branches of Red Cross in September.
“I have the copy of the memo my Lord, which I have attached on my answering affidavits. Red Cross Society has eight branches and all the branches were informed of the AGM.
Why did he wait until the December 8 to lodge his case? Urgency is self-created here. Again the applicant had not played or shown evidence that urgency was not self created,” Magora said.
She said the applicants’ founding affidavit carried a lot of damaging allegations about the respondent, allegations which do not or are not supported by facts or any form of evidence.
“The court cannot rely on hearsay my Lord. We need evidence which support the allegations,” she said. The case has been set for argument early next year.