CoA dismisses Malema�s appeal

Goitsemodimo Kaelo | Wednesday November 1, 2017 14:57

 

Malema and his son had approached the High Court on urgent basis seeking an interdict against Ezekiel Joel, Dimakatso Patane and Onkemetse Seromula who were recently installed by the Minister of Local Government and Rural Development Slumber Tsogwane as the traditional leadership following Malema’s retirement.

But Justice Leatile Dambe of Gaborone High Court dismissed the case as the applicants failed to show that they had locus standi, provide sufficient grounds on why the matter is urgent, and to show that the ouster clause of the Bogosi Act does not apply. Following their dismissal, the Malemas approached the CoA seeking an expedited appeal of Dambe’s judgement.

Yesterday, CoA Judge, Isaac Lesetedi dismissed the application for an expedited hearing of appeal with costs.

Justice Lesetedi said the case is clearly just a personal dispute by the applicants to assert themselves for the tribal positions they are contending for.

“There is nothing to show that the tribal community from which they come, and which they purport to represent, has in any way mandated them to act for it in the dispute or that it is adversely affected by the intended appeal being heard in its turn.

That point by the applicants must therefore fail,” Lesetedi said. 

He said no other members of the Babirwa community are joined in the litigation for any of the causes subject to the litigation. He also said the applicants failed to follow the CoA rules which permits for the filing of proposed grounds of appeal to accompany an application for an expedited hearing of appeal. He stated that the grounds of appeal are used to persuade the appellate court that the applicant has an appeal worthy of consideration in terms of prospects of success.

“Though claiming the appeal to be urgent therefore requiring an expedited hearing, the applicants have not shown any due diligence in the pursuit of that appeal in that as at the date of hearing of this application, almost close to a month after delivery of the decision appealed against, a notice of appeal had yet to be filed,” he added.

Furthermore, Justice Lesetedi indicated that the applicants have failed to show that they will suffer any material prejudice from the refusal of the interdict.

He also said that the applicant failed to show how stopping the respondents’ appointments served the interests of the Babirwa community. He said interdicting the respondents would leave a void in the tribal administration of the Babirwa community especially in Bobonong and will bring a hiatus in tribal matters and resolution of tribal disputes in the area.

“With regard to the ouster clause of the Bogosi Act, the court rightly pointed out that there are exceptions to that ouster, such as exceptions being where the questioned Act was done in bad faith or ultra vires the Bogosi Act,” he said.