12 Feb 2020

The High Court in Gaborone, on Monday, ruled against an objection to disqualify a sign language interpreter. 

Delivering the ruling on Monday, Justice Omphemetse Motumise said the interpreter, Mr Ntsimane Karae shall take oath of office, that he would interpret truthfully and honestly, failing of which he would be liable to criminal sanctions.

Justice Motumise said the witness, Mr Samuel Motlhabeng was a confident and compatible witness and therefore will be able to relate his evidence before court with the aid of an interpreter. 

He said Mr Karae was the only available person to interpret.

The ruling followed an objection by the second respondent attorney, Mr Busang Manewe in an election petition trial where Mr Mogalakwe Mogalakwe is petitioning the outcome of an election result for the Mosolotshane/Moralane ward in the Shoshong constituency.

On Thursday, the petitioner had called a witness, Mr Samuel Motlhabeng with both hearing and speech impairment, to which Mr Manewe raised an objection with reference to the interpretation made by Mr Karae. 

Mr Manewe said it was difficult for his client to follow the proceedings since the interpreter and the witness spoke a language that was only peculiar to them.

Prior to making the pronouncement, the court gave the concerned parties chance to discuss the issue with the view of establishing a common understanding and advise the court accordingly.

Mr Manewe informed the court that their meeting failed to struck a common understanding. 

“We had an opportunity to discuss the difficulty we are facing but could not reach any fruitful conclusion,” said Manewe. 

Mr Manewe said their objection did not dispute the fact the people with hearing and speech impairment were competent and therefore had the right to give evidence before a court of law. 

Therefore, he said the court should strike a balance between the right of the disabled to give evidence in court as witnesses and the fundamental right of other parties in having the ability to follow evidence.

He said the alleged sign language could not be interpreted by any other person even those learned in sign language. 

For his part, Advocate Otsile Rammid of IEC, also concurred with Mr Manewe that it would be difficult to tell whether the evidence relayed to court was from the witness or the interpreter. 

“Since he was also privy to the details of the case, we are likely to get the interpreter’s evidence not that of the witness,” said Advocate Rammidi.

He emphasised on the need to get an independent interpreter.

The petitioner’s attorney, Mr Patrick Kgoadi said it was up to the court to make a determination by assessing the witness’s evidence in relation to the interpretation. 

Mr Kgoadi said the interpreter was not learned in sign language and therefore could not be replaced by any other interpreter.

Giving his evidence in chief with aid of an interpreter, Mr Motlhabeng indicated that on the day of the election he was accorded an opportunity to vote without the aid of an election officer or any other assistant.

 In his brief testimony, he indicated that even at previous elections, he voted without assistance. Mr Motlhabeng also disclosed that he voted for two parties being the Alliance for Progressives (AP) and the Botswana Democratic Party (BDP) on the same ballot paper.

Under cross examination by the respondents’ attorneys, Mr Motlhabeng indicated that he had not read his written affidavit as he only remembered putting down his signature to it. 

It was established that his written affidavit stated that the IEC officer assisted him in voting while under cross examination he stated that he cast his vote without any form of assistance.  ENDS