10 Jul 2019

A three-member bench led by the Land Tribunal president, Judge Boitumelo Kaisara, has repeated issuance of an order against Mr Clement Kgosiemang, a claimant at the centre of the Molepolole Ratlhomelang Cemetery dispute.

The order, issued July 9, followed non-compliance of similar ones against the appellant over the same piece of land, prompting the tribunal to repeat itself by ordering for submission of paginated buddle within 14 days by the appellant to the respondents.

The appellant was also ordered to pay the first and second respondents, Kweneng District Council and the land board, P1 000 each before the next hearing, scheduled for August 6,7 and 19.

Meanwhile, the land board was told to update the sketch plan of the disputed area within seven days.

The decision to postpone the matter followed an application by Mr Kgosiemang requesting the postponement because his attorney was on sick leave.

“I was called this morning by the court sherriff informing me of some documents being left at Engine Filling Station, communicating my attorney Bhekimpilo Sibanda’s absence from duty, due to ill health,” stated Mr Kgosiemang.

The postponement did not sit well with the land board and council attorneys who complained that Mr Kgosiemang had the tendency of applying delaying tactics because he did not want the case brought to finality.

Attorney Ricardo Seabueng expressed disappointment at the manner in which the appellant was handling the matter stating that on a number of instances he had called for postponement.

“I am disappointed that despite issuance of orders for concerned parties to halt usage of the disputed piece of land, there was none compliance on the side of the appellant, but without action against him,” said Mr Seabueng.

He insisted that the court issue an order instructing the appellant to remove the fence around the area in question to avoid his benefiting through grazing of livestock.

Attorney Alfred Baikakedi representing the land board also raised concern over lack of commitment by Mr Kgosiemang echoing Counsel Seabueng’ sentiments over the appellant’s alleged delaying tactics.

“The appellant is holding Bakwena at ransom by dragging us from pillar to post, impacting on completion of the case that had been dragging for long.  

Let us have dates that will make the matter progress even in the absence of the appellant,” Mr Baikakedi said.

The tribunal’s recent site visit to the disputed piece of land noticed ongoing construction of a four-roomed structure, different types of domestic animals on the disputed land, despite previously issued orders for halting usage.

Nine witnesses from the concerned parties are expected to testify when the case resumes on August 6.

The area’s Village Development Committee was allocated this piece of land as cemetery some years ago.

However, in 2011 Mr Kgosiemang lodged a complaint, claiming that this plot was a field, which he bought from Mr Kgopolo Thipe.

By the time he made the claim, two people had already been buried there.

The VDC was then compelled to remove the fence because the piece of land was already in dispute.

Kweneng Land Board later ruled that the land belonged to VDC, hence Mr Kgosiemang’s appeal to the Land Tribunal. ENDS