High Court blasts Trusts for dividing Ditshiping
Maun High Court judge, Bugalo Maripe has described a small village in the Okavango Delta, Ditshiping, as a village at war with itself.
Maripe made the remarks last Friday when deliberating on a complex case involving a conflict between two community development trusts which operate within the village and its peripheries, Honey Guide Adventure Trust (HGAT) and Okavango Kopano Mokoro Community Development Trust (OKMCT).
At the heart of the fall-out is Ditshiping’s membership in OKMCT.
This is because in November 2021, Lobatse High Court ruled that Ditshiping be removed from OKMCT, as HGAT successfully argued the village wanted to be under their care.
However, in August last year, 73 out of Ditshiping’s 367 villagers approached Maun High Court as a matter of urgency, trying to stop OKMCT’s Annual General Meeting (AGM) from taking place without them, claiming the village had reapplied to join the Development Trust.
Maripe duly issued a court order granting the villagers’ wishes, only to promptly rescind it when Honey Guide protested, insisting the 73 were talking nonsense.
“The whole dispute, including the issues in the Lobatse matter, signifies a village that is at war with itself. This is unfortunate, especially for the ordinary villagers who rely on the advice of those deemed to have some knowledge of the issues involved or at least have the wherewithal [means] to influence others,” noted Maripe.
The two cases are a tussle between HGAT and OKMCT over the prime piece of NG32 land where Ditshiping is located – a wildlife protected zone rich in wildlife and flora some 66km north west of Maun.
While HGAT has divorced OKMCT to stand on its own, it demands to be given part of OKMCT assets, especially the land, so they can freely operate.
“This matter presents a tussle for opportunity and a desire for control in the affairs of entities set-up to implement government programmes geared towards empowering local communities in the preservation and exploitation of natural resources,” continued Maripe.
A quick background to the squabble shows HGAT was established in 1996 by the people of Ditshiping.
A year later, government brought together six villages in Bojanala area: Ditshiping, Xuxao, Daunara, Xhaxhaba, Boro and Xaraxau and helped them form a new Trust, OKMCT. The objectives are said to be broadly similar to those of Honey Guide.
“Thus Ditshiping residents have two potential memberships and it does appear that some hold dual membership. This incidence of dual membership seems to be the trigger to the current dispute,” reasoned Maripe.
“I have outlined how Messers: Tumeletso Oja and Gosegonna Gontshamang and to some extent Mr Bimbo Boikaego were instrumental in the formation of Honey Guide and how they were instrumental later on in the formation of OKMCT. Now they appear to be instrumental in the intractable divorce proceedings between Ditshiping and OKMCT,” continued the Judge.
Maripe further noted the kgotla seemed to have become entangled in the dispute and called upon village leadership to exercise due discretion when handling such matters.
“Meetings of the two are held there. In the end, issues arise of whether a meeting held was a proper kgotla meeting or it was a gathering of people bent on pursuing a sectarian agenda,” he added.
Trusts are formed under Community Based Natural Resources Management Policy (CBNRM), introduced by govt in the early 90s.
The purpose is to encourage communities living in wildlife protected zones to conserve natural resources in their areas and exploit them for the betterment of their lives.
Some of the resources that help these communities rake in millions include wildlife through hunting safaris, and land, which is leased out to big tourism companies.
However, Maripe noted such trusts are often hampered by disputes arising from selfish interests.
“So much time and energy is consumed in resolving disputes of control rather than galvanizing and consolidating the opportunities provided for betterment of the lives of the ordinary citizens and residents in the relevant areas,” he scolded, before giving HGAT 14 days to respond to the matter.
