Mmegi

Garekwe labels Morupisi court redress malicious

Justice Garekwe.PIC MORERI SEJAKGOMO
Justice Garekwe.PIC MORERI SEJAKGOMO

Justice Mercy Garekwe of the Court of Appeal (CoA) says convicted former Permanent Secretary to the President, Carter Morupisi’s acts of accusing her of bias screams of malice and it is meant to embarrass her in an open court.

Justice Garekwe, who yesterday refused to recuse herself from presiding over a case in which the State is seeking to overturn Morupisi’s release from prison, has come down heavy on the latter and his attorneys for levelling unsubstantiated accusations of bias against her. In her ruling, Justice Garekwe says the allegations made against her are not only bold, but the actions of attorney Obonye Jonas and his client (Morupisi) do not evince actions of people who reasonably apprehended any reasonable bias on her part as a result of what she is alleged to have done. “The applicant who was not in my presence at the time it is alleged I sought to influence State attorney, Tshiamo Rantao, not to abandon the stay relief, informs the court that he was informed by his attorney, Jonas, about what transpired. Safe for the generalised allegation that I sought to so do, there is no clear, logical and convincing evidence pointing to how I did what I am alleged to have done; what words or actions I used, which could have led Jonas to perceive them as persuasion directed at Rantao not to abandon the stay relief,” she stated The judge explained that it is simply stated in the founding affidavit that she sought to persuade Rantao by calling upon him not to abandon the stay application, which it is said Rantao cringed and looked unamused and uncomfortable owing to the suggestion that she made to him, which had the trappings of coaching him on how to conduct his clients' case.

She said the suggestion that Rantao reacted in the manner he is alleged to have done, paints a picture of something very serious having been said or done by her. “From his words, Jonas observed everything and to the extent that this application has been brought and these allegations made, it suggests that he used his full faculties on the day and at the time in question to fully inform himself on what transpired in my Chambers,” Garekwe said. Justice Garekwe stated that the meeting referred to was held in her Chambers on Saturday afternoon, January 4, 2024 and Morupisi, though not part of those who were in her Chambers, was in court. She said in the proceedings, surely, the opportunity arose, more so when the matter was still fresh in the mind of Jonas to not only inform him of my perceived biased conduct, a conduct that evinced that “what I desired was to see him in prison” as it has been alleged, but to also advise him regarding seeking my recusal. “I later, after a passage of a reasonably long period of time, entered court for purposes of issuing the scheduling order. Having had the opportunity to speak to his client, the opportunity presented itself for Jonas, on behalf of the applicant, to raise the issue of their discomfort and disquiet with my behaviour and/or attitude. This they did not do,” the judge said.

She pointed out that Morupisi and his attorney had the whole night to ponder over her alleged behaviour and the morning of Sunday January 5, 2025 and the matter was next heard in open court on the afternoon of the following day. The judge said Morupisi and his attorney once more had an opportunity to alert her in advance in chambers of their disquiet about her behaviour and perceived bias or even publicly in open court, which they still did not. Justice Garekwe said rather they submitted to her jurisdiction and the matter was fully argued and a day (January 6, 2025) passed without any action on their part only for him to abruptly file an urgent application a day before the ruling.

“It is paramount also to observe that he is conspicuously silent on when exactly his attorney informed him of my impugned behaviour and they have also not sought to explain the delay or inaction of three days when fully aware that the matter before me was an urgent one being dealt with speedily, and that they themselves have moved this very application on urgency,” she revealed Moreover the judge pointed that it was trite, to disclose all reasons and circumstances (good and bad) that delayed them or prevented them from filing the application earlier than they have. Justice Garekwe also said instead they did nothing but waited for the matter to be fully argued and a ruling reserved only to seek her recusal later, questioning if anything happened during argument that made him lose confidence in his own case. She noted that it was clear the application was an afterthought as the behaviour of the former PSP and his attorney of not acting upon their apprehended bias shortly after they perceived same negates unreasonableness of any suspicion of bias. On the Tsodilo, the judge explained that indeed she presided over it some years ago, and fail to connect such case with the fact of her presiding over the Morupisi’s application where her duty was to assess whether or not the State have made out a case for an order to have their appeal heard on an expedited basis.

“He contends that I dismissed his suit and that such decision meant that it was true that he was corrupt as alleged by a certain newspaper. The statement was truly made and stated and was subsequently confirmed by criminal charges against him. The article reported on a matter of public interest in respect of him who at the material time was a highly influential figure in the Botswana society who held important posts,” she said. She noted that she did not know if Morupisi’s perceived bias comes from the mere fact that she decided that case against him or what, which she noted that in her many years on the bench, she has not heard of that being a plausible reason for the recusal of a judge. “If that were true or allowed, there would be a shortage of judges to adjudicate over many disputes. It is apparent that this application is totally unmerited, a red herring, an abuse of the court and its processes,” she explained.

The judge concluded that for Morupisi to act in the manner he has, without proper or reasonable justification, smacks of malice, unreasonableness and it is an attempt at playing delaying tactics on his part.

Editor's Comment
UDC's 100 Days: Please deliver your promises!

We duly congratulate them to have ousted the long ruling Botswana Democratic Party (BDP) from power. Prior to taking power from the BDP, the coalition had made several election promises that are credited for influencing change and swaying the people to vote in its favour.The party had made an undertaking, which its leader and President Duma Boko consistently bellowed in his campaign trail. These undertakings were promises that Batswana would be...

Have a Story? Send Us a tip
arrow up