Seretse's company in the spy web

GIDEON NKALA
Staff Writer | Thursday December 2, 2010 00:00

 

In a contentious letter that was discussed in court it is stated that RFT Botswana, a company associated with former minister  Ndelu Seretse was one of the companies that had bid to supply the spy equipment.   RFT Botswana was not succesful in the tender as it was withdrawn and  a new tender was subsequently floated. The former minister is currently facing a single count of corruption for failing to disclose his interest in a police tender to President Ian Khama.

From yesterday morning until the better part of the afternoon, Advocate Sidney Pilane, for Dukef (the company that is suing the police for breach of contract), led public witness, Edward Mholo who came to court by a subpoena (forced via a court order to come and give evidence).

In his evidence-in-chief, Mholo said the equipment, known as AGIS (Advanced GSM Interception System), was actually tested in the field. He said they went to Oodi, Modipane, Phakalane and Government Enclave to listen to conversations and confimed that the equipment worked. He explained that the device was so small that it was delivered in a car.

He described th equipment as a set of two laptops with an antenna, receivers, cables and cases. One of the nagging questions that seemed to be paramount in the papers submitted by the state, to the point that it appears bothersome to the plaintiff, is that the equipment was only effective on Orange calls but not Mascom.

Pilane wanted Mholo to give an explanation, possibly to lay to rest this point. The witness said it appeared that between the tender award and procurement of the spy equipment, Mascom migrated to third generation technology.

At this point the court was reduced to a cell phone lecture room. Mholo, who it must be said is a very confident and articulate witness, explained that first generation technology is the base form of phones that can only do voice. Next is second generation technology, which can be phones that do voice and data including some picture capability. The third generation he said is an improvement in that there is a multi-media component such as emails, video, Internet and transmission of live pictures. Such phones he said include I-phones and Blackberry.

The court heared that third generations technology could not be tapped into with the spy equipment that the police had purchased.

Before Pilane could release Mholo from his clutches he asked him a number of questions the object of which seemed to punch holes and anticipate the evidence of the upcoming state witnesses. He said about these witnesses including the deputy Commissioner of Police, Ikotlhaeng Bagopi, that they have very little technical knowledge. No one made the conclusion and no one asked for it but it was clear to everyone- with little or no technical knowledge these matters are above the witnesses' expertise.

Then came the time of cross-examination and state counsel Nchunga Nchunga rose to his feet.

Nchunga: Are you a member of the Police Service?Mholo: I am a member of the Police Service.

Nchunga: Are you on interdiction?

Mholo: Yes, I am on interdiction.

Nchunga: You introduced yourself as a Senior Superintendent but earlier on you had said you were an Assistant Commissioner. What happened to your title? Why were you demoted?

I will suggest to you that it was because of this tender?Mholo: I will agree that it was out of this tender.

The gloves were off.

Nchunga suggested that the tender was the brainchild of Mholo but the witness denied the claim saying that it was owned by the police and that he was answerable to his superiors.

Nchunga took issue with a letter that was supposedly written in February 11, 2008 but was faxed in January 2007.

He said this letter was found in possession of Duke April from Dukef Holdings, the company which has instituted the case.

'This letter was faxed before it was written,' Nchunga asserted. 

Mholo had earlier told court that some tender specifications were altered when it was realised that they were technically superfluous. Nchunga suggested that Mholo had no authority to alter the tender without the consent of PPADB. But Mholo said the PPADB regulations gave the procuring department the licence to vary the tender provided they inform all bidders of such changes.

Coming to the nub of the case, Nchunga suggested that the police had always wanted a fully-fledged system but this was varied by Mholo to a 5.2 system.

In response Mholo said the instruction was given by Deputy Commissioner Bagopi that they should get a lower system within their budget of P12 million with a provision for future upgrade. At that point court adjourned to March 12-18. The state is expected to call seven witnesses while the plaintiff (Dukef) will call two more.