Court worker charged with giving false information
Lebogang Mosikare | Wednesday September 20, 2017 13:00
The state alleges that Neo Masuku and another not before court on November 25, 2015 at the Francistown Magistrate’s Court acting jointly with common purpose gave false information to Tshepiso Puoeng, an immigration administrator, and as such a public officer by stating that Simbarashe Mapfumo, a Zimbabwean, had a pending appeal case at the High Court and deserved an extension of his stay in Botswana which information they knew to be false in all material respects.
The charge sheet adds that the information caused Puoeng to extend Mapfumo’s stay in Botswana, which act she would not have done if the true state of facts were known to her (Puoeng). Testifying before court, Puoeng said she met Mapfumo on November 15, 2015 when he came to the immigration office to ask for a waiver to extend his stay in Botswana because he alleged that he had a case at the High Court here, which he wanted to appeal.
“Mapfumo had a letter from the Francistown Magistrates Courts that was written by Neo Masuku. The letter asked us to extend Mapfumo’s days in Botswana... I took the matter to my supervisor Dimpho Mathumo. Mathumo told me to ask Masuku about the progress of the letter since Mapfumo was given a waiver in 2014. I called Masuku by phone and told her what my supervisor told me,” Puoeng said. Masuku, Puoeng said, told her that Mapfumo was tried and sentenced and was supposed to confirm payment before appealing at the High Court.
“She also told me that Mapfumo’s appeal will be heard in January 2016. I told Masuku that I will refer Mapfumo to her and that she should include all the information that she said was missing when I called her by phone…On December 16, 2015 Mathumo called me to her office. She wanted me to investigate about Mapfumo’s alleged pending case at the High Court and what to do with Mapfumo’s passport, which they had in their possession,” Puoeng said.
However Masuku’s attorney Keitshegile Sechele argued that the letter purportedly authored by Masuku should not be admitted in court as part of evidence because it was not properly before court. He said that the letter was an unofficial document because the director of the Directorate of Public Prosecutions (DPP) had not authorised the production of such a letter as per Section 55 of the Criminal Procedures ad Evidence Act. “We submit that in the absence of the DPP’s director to order for the production of such letter, we would not accept the letter as it is not properly before court,” Sechele said.
State counsel, Sesafeleng Dijeng admitted that they did not have orders or instructions from the DPP’s director to produce such letter in court. Under cross-examination from Sechele, Puoeng admitted extending a waiver for Masuku until December 3, 2015. “I also admit that the letter I received influenced me to extend waiver for Mapfumo. It would also not be correct to say that the letter in question was prepared according to my instruction,” Puoeng said.
Probed further by Sechele, Puoeng contradicted herself saying that she did not know if the letter was written according to her instructions when she communicated with Masuku over the phone. When re-examined by Dijeng, Puoeng who was visibly shaken by Sechele’s questioning somersaulted from her previous position saying that the accused instructed her to write the letter. The investigating officer, Thomba told the court that on December 21, 2015 they received a verbal report from Magistrate Jeniffer Chikate about extending Mapfumo’s stay in Botswana.
“The department of immigration gave us copies of letters to extend waiver for Mapfumo. We investigated the matter and found out that Mapfumo had no appeal case pending at the High Court as was said in the letters we got from the immigration department. We later decided to charge the accused with the charges that she is currently facing, but we first charged her with abuse of office which we later dropped for the current charge,” Thomba said.
When being cross-examined by Sechele, Thomba admitted that the statement obtained from Masuku was obtained un-procedurally. Thomba also admitted that there was no letter from a handwriting expert that was presented in court to show that the handwriting specimen that Thomba told the court was obtained from the accused was indeed hers. Magistrate Gofaone Morweng presides over the case that is still continuing.