Seretse stands accused

Staff Writer | Thursday September 2, 2010 00:00

 

Yesterday at the Village Magistrates Courts, Seretse was hauled before Barnabas Nyamadzabo, a magistrate who only three days ago officially referred to Seretse in sartorial salutations.

On this day he has no occasion to refer to Seretse in lofty titles such as honourable Dikgakgamatso Seretse. The magistrate simply calls him, the accused. Instead of the police acting as an escort as part of the official frills, the officer on duty simply beckons the former minister to the accused's box.

The man carrying the responsibility to rake Seretse over live coals is none other than Leonard Sechele, employed under the stewardship of Seretse at the Directorate of Intelligence and Security and now the director of the Directorate of Public Prosecution.  On this day Sechele brings his former boss to court because he believes that Seretse has cheated in his dealings with the police. The courtroom is overflowing with interest. All seating space has been taken up.

The stakes are just too high. A minister responsible for defence and justice has been charged with corruption. The President's own blood cousin and right hand man has been investigated and charged by prosecutors who worked under him. Even the new DPP boss, who is yet to find his footing at the department, has seen it fit to personally take the cudgels and lead from the front.

Will this case be the guinea pig that tests Sechele's independence and lays to rest the DIS ghost that seemed to shadow his appointment?

'Your worship, I know I have not had the time to introduce myself since my celebrated appointment,' Sechele says perhaps tongue- in-cheek. There are some smiles and giggles around the court, more perhaps in recognition of Sechele's way of breaking the ice and announcing his arrival as the DPP head.

When the commotion dies down he announces that the DPP is ready to proceed. Parks Tafa, the attorney acting for Seretse rises and tells the court that he objects to his client taking a plea saying it was premature. He said before his client could plead the defence demands that the prosecution furnishes them with a number of things. He wants a list of prospective prosecution witnesses, copies of statements of all prospective prosecution witnesses, certified copies of all documentary exhibits. Further, the defence says they want to be allowed an opportunity to inspect the cabinet records in respect of disclosures held by the permanent secretary to the President.

In demanding these Tafa said the prosecution was under obligation to provide these documents as per the court precedent that has since been established during the now famed case of Wasim Ahmed versus the Attorney General.

He said the importance of the Wasim case is that there should be no surprises during trial.

'At the moment we just have the charge sheet and the summons. We are groping in the dark,' he said. Tafa said it was important that the two parties  look at all the documents pertaining to the case and he suggested that at the end of the inspection of the documents it might well be that there would be no basis for prosecution.

After tendering  a letter which he said hadbeen written to the DPP on Monday requesting the prosecution to avail some documents, Tafa made a submission which provided a peep into what Seretse's defence is likely to be.

Tafa said a cursory glance at the charge sheet shows that there are factual inconsistencies in the charge sheet. He stated that while Seretse is charged with failure to declare interest in a company known as RFT, records will show that his client has always declared his interest to the President, as far back as 2004. In fact, he singled out a disclosure form dated May 28, 2008 in which Seretse is said to have declared his directorship in RFT (PTY) LTD to the President.

It was at this point that Sechele objected saying that Tafa was leading evidence from the bar but Tafa retorted saying he was merely introducing evidence contained in an attachment to the letter that the DPP had received and acknowledged in court.

He said the defence would further demand minutes of a cabinet meeting that presided over the police tender. According to Tafa, the charge sheet which states that Seretse failed to disclose his interest to the head of cabinet - the President - presupposes that cabinet dealt with a police tender. Clawing at the charge, he said he was fully aware that cabinet does not deal with tenders. Without saying so it seems his contention is that the charge is frivolous.

Perhaps as a warning shot to the DPP Tafa said he was aware that the DPP has a right to charge people whether they have evidence or not but he threatens that if the prosecution is found to be malicious they will seek a review.

Sechele objected to the suggestion that the prosecution is in the habit of prosecuting people even if there is no evidence.

'We at the DPP are not on a voyage to destroy people's reputations. Whether someone is from rural areas, cities or is prominent we treat everyone fairly,' he says.

Sechele then conceded and informed court that the prosecution would avail the sought documents to the defence except that the defence wants certified copies.  Tafa then informs court that at that stage even copies will suffice.

Reacting to the question posed by Tafa, whether the prosecution considers the permanent secretary to the President a potential witness Sechele answers in the affirmative. The court then rules that the case comes up for mention on October 6 and that Seretse be granted bail.