Kgosi demands his 200 cows back from the govt
Former Director General of the Directorate of Intelligence and Security (DIS) Isaac Kgosi is a troubled man.
The former spy boss is worried that he might soon be impoverished by the State forfeiture of over 200 of his cows and properties which was effected five years ago.
In a case which happens to be the latest in a myriad of his legal batles, Kgosi has approached the High Court to allow him to file additional papers to fight the Government, particularly the Office of the Receiver and the Directorate of Public Prosecutions (DPP) to release his cattle and other properties.
The assets were forfeited in connection with an investigation that commenced in 2011 on suspicions that he acquired over 200 cows, plots and vehicles from proceeds of crime. He has consistently and vehemently denied these accusations.
In court documents, Kgosi has lamented that the cattle were subjected to neglect. He expressed concern that the herd might die if the Department of Public Prosecution and the Receiver do not bring a formal application for forfeiture, thereby rendering him destitute.
This week, Kgosi said that he was delayed due to reliance on the wrong Section of the Proceed and Instruments of Crime Act (PICA). “Had the proper Section been used from the commencement of the Application, the said confirmatory Affidavits would have been filed together with the founding affidavit,” reads the papers from Tafila attorneys.
“I aver that I filed an application before this court under Section 44 (1) and (8) of the Proceeds of Crime Act. The said Section requires the Applicant to prove that the property was not acquired through proceeds of crime. Initially, the said application to release the properties in issue was filed under Section 39 of the PICA, which simply required that where an application for a civil penalty order of a civil forfeiture order has not been made, such as application must be made within 120 days of the granting of this order. Consequently, at the time of filing, the applicant did not prove anything other than that government failed to bring an application for a forfeiture order within 120 days,” he says in the papers.
He added that after carefully studying the PICA he saw it prudent to amend his initial documents so that the application to discharge the properties is made under Section 44 of PICA instead of Section 39 and same was by consent of the parties.
“Unfortunately, in amending the notice of motion, it now meant that I have to prove that the property was not acquired through proceeds of crime. A founding affidavit was already filed and there was no way I could amend the founding affidavit to include and prove factual allegations that the properties were bought by funds from friends, as stipulated from the founding affidavit.”
Kgosi stated that his friends gave him funds to purchase the said cows and properties and the friends are ready to confirm and swear to his source of funds. He added that they have previously sworn to confirmatory affidavits to the effect that they gave him funds to purchase some of the properties in issue. The matter was postponed to a later date at Kgosi’s costs.
Some of Kgosi’s properties in question include Sentlhane farm No18. K-O near Mokolodi Nature Reserve, Lot 61299 Gaborone,Land Rover vehicle registered B414AXU, Land Cruiser vehicle registered B975BHI, Cows – 200 heifers, 24 Simmental, 36 Brahman, 1 Brahman bull, as well as cash amounting P549 763.07, held at Barclays Bank of Botswana.
