06 Mar 2019

Jwaneng magistrate, Mr Odirile Mokgatle has dismissed an application in which he was requested to recuse himself from a fraud case.

Defence counsel, Mr Thabo Malambane had requested Mr Mokgatle to recuse himself from a case in which his client, Prophet Bonang of Pure Gospel Bible Church in Jwaneng, is accused of intent to defraud by presenting himself as Neo Tanka and further providing false information to acquire a national identity card, passport and driver’s licence.

Mr Malambane had submitted that the magistrate should recuse himself because he (Mr Mokgatle) had commented on a Facebook post, which talked about the accused, which he said could raise eyebrows about the magistrate’s judicial ethics and further indicated that the court had already taken a stand against the accused before judgement was passed.   

He had also advanced that the court had on February 6 proceeded with trial in the absence of the defence counsel, something which he said could disadvantage his client. Further, the defence counsel had said that it was not procedural for the court to have ordered for a DNA test between the accused and his alleged mother without any application from either the prosecution or accused. 

When dismissing the application, Mr Mokgatle noted that the defence counsel failed to avail convincing reasons why he should recuse himself. He said his Facebook comment was just a sympathy statement on a journalistic page, which had nothing to do with the case before court. He noted that even though he is a judicial officer, he is human being and is allowed to be on social media as long as he does not compromise judicial ethics.

Further, the magistrate said the defence counsel was aware of trial dates, but went on to double-book himself on February 6, which resulted in him attending another matter at Lobatse High Court on the said date.  

“We had to adjourn the matter to 11am as requested by the accused to wait for you, but you were not present at 12 noon when we resumed trial. You have long been aware of the dates as they were confirmed on five mentions,” explained Mr Mokgatle.

He further said it was not the duty of the court to look for the defence attorney and also noted that Mr Malambane was the third attorney to represent the accused since the matter was registered, after the other two vanished without a note.

On the issue of DNA test order, Mr Mokgatle submitted that contrary to what Mr Malambane said, the prosecution made an application before court on July 20, 2018 after which the court advised both parties make written submissions. He said while the defence failed to advance their submissions, the prosecution requested the court to use its discretion to order for a DNA test between the accused and his alleged mother Margaret Tanka, who was added to the witness list during the course of the trial. The case continues tomorrow. END