Sebina Brothers Ask Court to Rescind Search Warrant
Goitsemodimo Kaelo | Monday February 3, 2020 17:03
Attorney Unoda Mack also pleaded with the court to issue an immediate order releasing the properties of the mentioned companies that were seized under the same warrant.
About a year ago, DIS director general, Peter Magosi appeared before Magistrate Kgerethwa and took an oath implicating the Sebina brothers and their companies in alleged acts of corruption.
Kegone and Tshepho Sebina own the companies. Magosi made it clear that the investigations then being carried out were directed against all those suspected to be associated with Isaac Kgosi, the former DIS boss. The Sebina brothers then subpoenaed Magosi to appear before Kgerethwa, give evidence and produce to the Court the several documents which link the brothers to Kgosi.
On Friday, Mack told the court that they were forced to abandon the subpoena but rather seek an expunction of Magosi’s evidence and cancellation of the warrant after the Attorney General refused Magosi to take stand.
Mack argued that in Motion and ex parte proceedings, only founding affidavit constitutes pleadings. He said the warrant should not have been issued in the first place because the Court relied on Magosi’s oral evidence to grant it.
“If the founding affidavit is insufficient then one has to file a supplementary affidavit but that wasn’t done in this case. For the court to indulge such an applicant who came ex parte should demonstrate why it is important to do that and why it wasn’t included in the founding affidavit,” argued Mack.
Mack also argued that in Magosi’s founding affidavit, there is no mention of the companies belonging to the Sebina brothers.
He said in the application for the warrant, the State did not explain the state of the company that is subject to the search warrant and the offence alleged to have been committed.
“The State is afraid to let Magosi take stand because they will be exposed. Nothing has been demonstrated to justify the granting of that order. The search-and-seizure was dramatic and haphazard and did not even do an inventory. We seek immediate order releasing the properties to the applicants.” However, State counsel Thato Mujaji argued that the order or search-and-seizure was procedurally obtained. She said the court was satisfied with the application to grant an order.
“In an application for search-and-seizure, it is not provided for under Section 22 of the Intelligence Act for cross examination. Search warrants are granted on the strength of the application,” she argued.
She also added that Section 22(3) of the Intelligence Act empowers the Director General to search without a warrant.
Mujaji further said investigations in the matter were ongoing hence the property is withheld, arguing that the directors of these companies are close associates of Kgosi. She argued that there is a Court of Appeal authority that if performance of an order has been executed, then the order cannot be reversed.
Ruling on the matter has been set for today (Monday).