Former president, Ian Khama has labelled Directorate on Corruption and Economic Crime (DCEC) investigating officer, Jako Hubona a liar who deliberately fabricated evidence on a regular basis to suit his own narrative.
Khama, in his latest supporting affidavit to Welheminah Maswabi’s urgent bail application, warned the court when dealing with the State’s evidence from Hubona saying his conduct of fabricating evidence was actually his personality and character trait.
Khama explained that it was no secret that Hubona had a questionable character when it comes to presenting evidence arguing that the court also had evidence of such conduct from him.
“I say this because my attorneys, Ramalepa Attorneys, have discovered that the Regional Magistrate’s Court for the Gaborone Magisterial Region has, in a Judgement under Criminal Case Number CMRRS – 000003 – 18 delivered October 11, 2019, found that Hubona, fabricated evidence by adding extrinsic content to a witness’s sworn statement,” he said.
Khama said all allegations in relation to him on the Maswabi case are false, fictitious and clearly nonsensical and that’s the reason why he was prepared to challenge those allegations under oath.
He submitted that the allegation by the State as alleged in Hubona’s affidavit that on June 9, 2008, three special unit accounts were created by Bank of Botswana (BoB), under his instruction and the then director general of the Directorate of Intelligence and Security (DIS), Isaac Kgosi were just fabrications.
“I have never instructed the Bank of Botswana on that date, or at any other date whilst I served as President of the Republic of Botswana, to open any Special Unit Accounts, or any account whatsoever,” he said. Khama noted that while it was true that he has for many years known Kgosi, he was not aware of any instruction made by the ex-spy chief to BoB, instructing them to open any account at all.
Khama argued that he has never jointly with Kgosi ever instructed the central bank as alleged by Hubona, hence it was not true. He challenged the State to bring forth such evidence.
While challenging the State, Khama said in any banking environment or in any financial institution, instructions of such nature alleged by Hubona must necessarily be recorded for, amongst many reasons, with audit evidence.
“It would therefore be very easy for the State to obtain evidence of such instruction and disclose it
He explained that he has already issued a press statement to the effect of Hubona’s lies and that in this particular case, he did not see why Maswabi should be denied bail based on lies presented to court as evidence.
The former Head of State also explained why he decided to depose an affidavit in this case.
“During my meeting with Mr [Uyapo] Ndadi on 1 November 2019, he advised me that, in an effort to make a case of denial of bail against his client, the State has made certain allegations of unlawful conduct with reference to me, and asked me whether there is any truth in those allegations.
I advised him that I have read the said allegations and that they are all false, fictitious and clearly nonsensical. Mr Ndadi then enquired from me whether I am prepared to challenge those allegations on oath. I answered in the affirmative, hence this Affidavit,” Khama explained.
Meanwhile, Regional Magistrate Masilo Mathaka chastised Hubona for embellishing evidence in a case involving attorney Friday Leburu recently.
Leburu was acquitted and discharged in a case in which he was accused of removing evidence contrary to section 119 as read with 33 of the Penal Code.
Mathaka said Hubona’s credibility in the matter was suspect in that his witness accused him of adding some content in her extra curial statement, which she never told him. According to him, it appeared that the IO in an endeavour to make his case watertight embellished evidence.
“The revelations by his witness, Oageng lead to such conclusion. She first denied being told about the vehicle being subject of investigations.
She then revealed that the IO added some content in her curial statement, which she never told him. I must say, with due respect, that the Investigating Officer, fared poorly as a witness,” he said.
Mathaka observed that the IO had the propensity to alter evidence, which is a serious dent on his credibility.