Is Gaolathe a constitutional deliquent?

Owen Nsala | Wednesday July 26, 2017 12:40

At the time, I remarked that “It was wrong in my view to wish away the decision of the working committee simply on the advice sought from their counsel without seeking to invalidate that decision before a competent tribunal.  I am of the view that president Gaolathe must seek audience with the courts to set aside the decisions of the committee for having been erroneously made under the apprehension that the powers so existed. 

To leave things as is and proceed on the basis that the decision to call off the elections and the ultimate suspensions are of no force and effect, is to create a breeding ground for anarchy and lawlessness. The nation needs clarity on this issue, and we cannot have whispers in divergence.

To whom do we listen to?” Failure to seek clarity with the Courts could inevitably lead to one thing, and that one thing is and has always been anarchy as the events in Bobonong so demonstrated. I hate to say I was right but hey, be your own judge. Leading to the Bobonong congress, the Ndaba Gaolathe axis emphasised just how disregarding of the Constitution the other camp was.

At each opportunity to remind, the Ndaba Gaolathe camp would drum it up to us through the media that the Modubule axis were in glaring disregard of the Constitution. The question never asked and with hindsight should never have been forgotten, should have been “ARE YOUR HANDS CLEAN IN THIS CONSTITUTIONAL VIOLATION ARGUMENT”  As each party threw salvos at each other, and each made counter accusations against the other, there was one standout argument delivered by the Mangole/Modubule faction, and assuming but without necessarily conceding that their version is correct, then hereunder would be my counsel.

The submissions by the Modubule/Mangole camp and corroborated by Advocate Pilane is to the extent that Gaolathe refused, and flatly so, to work cordially with those that were elected at the Gantsi Congress into the National Executive Committee (NEC).  For those without the know of the events of the Gantsi Congress, Ndaba Gaolathe’s faction had lost at Gantsi to Modubule/Mangole faction and Honourable Ndaba Gaolathe did not have the numbers that he had wished for when he went to the Gantsi Congress.

The analogy as we gather it is that Gaolathe refused to work with that committee and in the process alienated himself from the NEC.  Well, of course there is a semblance of truth given the corrosive relationship between the two camps, seeing that in the past the duo had shared a boxing ring using the media as the arena to share their displeasures towards each other. Now, if indeed Gaolathe refused to work with those that he was elected to work with by the Congress, the people and the masses, then he cannot claim to be a Constitutionalist. 

He would be a Constitutional delinquent of note. Gaolathe cannot lead people on his own set down conditions to the exclusion of the wishes of the masses. He cannot be a paragon of wisdom and the know-it-all to the sideline of the desires of the people. He cannot be allowed to dictate against a democratically-elected committee simply because those that he had wanted in his team did not even make it to the bench.

Talk of a captain who refuses to play because his mate, a striker has been turned into a goalkeeper by the Coach. I, for one would not want to have a leader who mirrors dictators in conduct and has a flagrant disregard of the Constitution simply because the events or the incidents born from the Constitution do not suit his tastes. Political institutions remain and people move on. 

The BMD would be in a serious error of judgement if indeed their then leader failed to respect their wishes and wanted a second term and which term should have been on condition that those that he aligns with make part of the NEC. If he was to be party president, how different would he be from known African dictators who survive and thrive on appeasing those close to them to the exclusion of those that are normally termed dissidents on account of failure to agree? Ndaba got a taste of  his own medicine.

He descended into the arena and went to Ramotswa to support a youth league election that the National Working Committee had called off. As a party leader, he must not have decided to be a Constitutional rebel and go against those that he was elected to lead with.  When the same thing happened in Bobonong, with the other camp holding its own election as he did in Ramotswa, he must not cry out loud because he started it. He became a leader of Constitutional delinquents. I put the BMD constitutional mess on his doorstep for failing to seek a legal and constitutional resolution when the opportunity was still alive.