Ngakaetsile filed an urgent application in November 2007 after BCP vetted him out. In his submissions, the applicant argued that the High Court of Botswana has inherent jurisdiction that is enshrined in the constitution to make a review. "As far as the court is concerned , the first respondent (BCP) has never filed any opposition," he submitted.He raised three issues for the court to decide. The first was whether the BCP's central
committee (CC) was empowered to vet out a potential candidate for primary elections or not. The second was, if the answer is yes, he questioned whether or not the committe could exercise those powers without affording the parties adversely affected by it an opportunity to make representations. If the answer is still in the affirmative, Ngakaetsile wanted to know whether the, committee, in vetting him out in this manner, exercised such powers reasonably, properly and without mala fides or not. "In terms of vetting, the applicant should not have been vetted out.
The court must make asubstantive order. The court should say the applicant should stand for elections basing on his application. The applicant has met all the requirements that were needed for a candidate to stand for primary elections. The applicant, in terms of campaigning, has spent a lot of money, energy and time knowing that he is eligible for standing," Ngakaetsile argued. BCP legal advisor, Gabriel Komboni said the court was competent to review decisions of a political party. Komboni emphasised that in order to establish grounds for review, Ngkaetsile must show that the decision was that of a tribunal, a board or an officer performing administrative acts.Komboni argued that the case of Kgotla Autlwetse vsBotswana Democratic Party (BDP) was relevant in this matter.
