Babirwa bogosi battle reaches High Court

Innocent Selatlhwa | Thursday September 14, 2017 16:23

Mmirwa Malema and his son Letso Malema have approached the court on an urgent basis seeking an order to interdict and restrai Bangwato Regent, Sediegeng Kgamane and Local Government and Rural Development minister, Slumber Tsogwane from appointing and/or recognising and/or installing respondents, Ezekiel Joel, Dimakatso Patane and Onkemetse Serumola, as baemela kgosi in the Babirwa bogosi.

The Malemas also want Joel, Patane and Serumola to desist from performing, or holding themselves to be performing the functions of a chief, chief’s representative or headman in relation to Babirwa bogosi, pending and until final determination of the review application to be instituted by the applicants.

They also want the court to direct that pending final determination of the review application, Tsogwane shall appoint from amongst the headmen of the Babirwa people, such competent and qualified individuals to act in the vacant positions created upon the retirement of Malema, the death of Joel Masilo, and Patane being interdicted. They want the appointments to be made in 30 days. Abel Modimo represents the Malemas. In their response, the Attorney General through Matlhogonolo Phuthego argued that neither of the applicants has locus standi to bring the application.

”The respondents dispute that the applicants have the right to bring the matter to court. On the contrary, the respondents submit, the applicants have no direct and substantial interest in the right, which is the subject matter of this litigation and in the outcome thereof,” Phuthego stated.

Phuthego said Malema senior had retired from his position as a kgosi and has failed to demonstrate that following his retirement, he still has the powers under Bogosi Act to choose his successor.

He also argued that both applicants failed to advance reasons as to why Letso cannot get substantial redress at the hearing in due course.  Justice Leatile Dambe has already made her views known that the matter was not urgent and ruling on the urgency will be delivered on Friday.