Justices Isaac Lesetedi, Leatile Dambe, Johan Froneman, Edwin Cameron and Goemekgabo Tebogo-Maruping when analysing the recusal application against Justice Kebonang, said the principal ground on which the latter’s recusal was sought was clearly established and reasonable. “It was established that his close family members benefited from funds of a company, following upon the unlawful award of a tender to that company by the Morupisis. There existed an association between the judge's twin brother and the controlling minds of that company. This association led to his brother receiving an undue payment,” said the bench. At the High Court, where Morupisi had filed a review of the Apex court decision against his seven years imprisonment, the Attorney General and Directorate of Public Prosecutions had sought for Justice Kebonang’s recusal citing he had close links with Morupisi as his mother and brother benefited from Morupisi’s unlawful acts.
When reading the judgment, Justice Lesetedi explained that the brother was later obliged to return that payment when the liquidator of the company hunted down the money trail. He pointed out that in addition, there was another association, stating that if it was not for the criminal acts of which Morupisi was convicted of, the company would not have received the very funds that were used to purchase a vehicle for the judge's mother and to make the undue payments to his brother. “The reasonable bystander could be readily be pardoned if she apprehended that the judge would be biased in favour of the respondent. Morupisi was the person who was the root cause of benefits that flowed to the judge's brother and to his mother,” explained Justice Lesetedi.
