Khama calls for fresh elections

Sharon Mathala

Former President, Ian Khama, has called on for fresh elections further calling on his predecessor Mokgweetsi Masisi and his Government to step down.

Khama made this revelation last Wednesday after a press conference to release an independent report on the alleged 100 billion pula loot he has been fingered in.

The report which was fully paid for by another key name in the case, South African Businesswoman Bridget Motsepe-Radebe – was compiled by Omnia strategy led by Cherrie Blair.

- Advertisement -

The report has since been made available to the public.

The report which has absolved Khama and Motsepe is centered on an ongoing court case involving suspended spy agent Welheminah Maswabi also known as ‘Butterfly’.

Another key figure in the case is the former head of intelligence, Isaac Kgosi.

Describing the matter as “settling petty political scores” Khama, in a strong-worded statement, said: “This regime has engaged in perjury by fabricating a false scenario of money laundering into offshore accounts. The clear criminal intent has now been exposed. This is a regime desperate to try and legitimize itself.”

Further stressing his point Khama said “If they can deliberately resort to criminal fabrication there’s no doubt they manipulated the election outcomes. Whatever may be left of their conscious I call upon them to relinquish power to pave way for free and fair elections. They are unfit to manage the affairs of our state.”

Khama further says he will now institute legal proceedings of defamation and perjury against the state.

- Advertisement -

The former President who is also patron of an opposition party- Botswana Patriotic Front (BPF), says together with Kgosi, Motsepe and Maswabi they will sue for defamation and perjury against the DCEC head, the DPP head, and investigator Jako Hubona.

Turning to the report itself, the 208-page document titled “Flies and lies” and dated 19 August 2020, punches holes into the state’s case, particularly the affidavit by state investigator for the DCEC, Hubona.

The report entails affidavits from named banks in the case, First National Bank in South Africa and in Botswana, ABSA bank, Nedbank bank, Bidvest bank, Investec Bank group who have all –according to the report- responded to Motsepe’s emails denying and refuting that there were accounts held in their institutions.

Quite critically according to an affidavit in the report purportedly from the South Africa Reserve Bank, “In reply we can confirm that the financial surveillance department of South African Reserve Bank could not find any record of the transaction referred to, the payment having been approved (cleared) either inbound or outbound or of any cross-border flow of funds in the amount referred to, inbound or outbound from South Africa.”

The report further reached out to international banks including the HSBC. “With respect to the personal and banking data referred to in the alleged international fund flows, in paragraph 19.2 of the affidavit (HSBC, Deutsche Bank, and Citibank) discussions with the impacted parties suggest that while the data itself is largely accurate (e.g names of individuals, passport numbers this data was obtained illegitimately and used for purposes of populating the affidavit and give it credibility. All concerned parties have alerted us to breaches of their data in the past two to three years which could explain its usage in the affidavit.”

- Advertisement -

Asked how credible the report is since it was financed by the very accused persons in the matter, Blair said they were instructed by Motsepe to “scrutinize the case without fear or favour.”

The Voice reached both the DCEC and DPP for comment but they could not be dragged into commenting on the matter.

Reached for comment, the Government of Botswana through Government spokesperson Andrew Sesinyi could only say “matters of due processes of justice and the law are defined by the courts in the Republic of Botswana. The report you refer to is unknown in the processes that we are aware of. We have no further comment on such matters as they ought to be dealt with accordingly by the due process of the law.”

1 Comment