23 Aug 2020

Gaborone High Court judge Justice Mokwadi Gabanagae has set August 31 as a date for defence to file its heads of argument on the no case to answer submission in a case involving former permanent secretary to the President, Carter Morupisi, R7 Group (PTY) Limited and Pinny Morupisi.

 The prosecution team will file their reply on September 09 while the case has been set for arguments on September 18.

 Defence lead attorney, Mr Busang Manewe on August 21 submitted to the court that the three accused have no case to answer. 

First accused Morupisi is facing two counts of corruption and is jointly charged with R7 Group (PTY) Limited and wife Pinny on one count of money laundering. 

Mr Manewe said since the prosecution had wrapped up its case, the defence team was of the view that based on the evidence presented their clients had no case to answer. He said looking at the bulky case material that was before court, the defence therefore needed to be given time to compile an affidavit supporting the no case to answer stance. 

Prior to submitting a no case to answer argument, the defence team engaged the investigating officer, Mr Kentse Setlaboshane from the Directorate on Corruption and Economic Crime (DCEC), as they interrogated his evidence in chief through cross examination. 

Mr Setlaboshane revealed that the investigating team had not engaged an accountant to assist in analysing the document that was used in compiling their case during investigations. 

Mr Setlabosheng said as per the contract signed by BPOPPF and Capital Management Botswana, Manor Squad Services was not in the list of companies that were identified as potential investors. 

However, Mr Setlaboshane said the investigations did not establish as to why some funds were transferred from CMB to Manor Squad Services account in South Africa. 

The investigating officer said efforts to interview directors of Kawena Holdings and Agile in South Africa who were supposed to receive the funds that were allegedly diverted to Manor Squad Services hit a snag. Mr Manewe put it to the investigating officer, that their failure to thoroughly investigate forced them to speculate that the funds were diverted to Manor Squad Services. 

“It was only after interviewing them that you can conclude that the money was diverted. The facts lies with Kawena and Agile,” said Mr Manewe. Mr Manewe said the investigators fell short in investigating the route taken by the money that was transferred to Manor Squad Services. 

Mr Manewe also asked the investigating officer, to explain as to why he suspected the deposits that were made into Morupisi’s account with USSD in its reference were from foreign accounts. Mr Manewe said the investigating team was running a theory that the transactions coded USSD were from foreign accounts. 

“Let me clear it for you, the abbreviated USSD code in the transactions that you deemed suspicious stands for Unstructured Supplementary Service Data and it’s a code that comes with a transaction that was made through a mobile phone,” said Mr Manewe. Mr Manewe said since the investigations commenced the investigating officer failed to establish what USSD meant only to make a statement that the transactions were from foreign accounts. 

The investigating officer also added that, he did not recall telling the court that the memorandum of agreement between Manor Squad Services and R7 Group Services for the purchase of a vehicle was signed by Rapula Okaile on behalf of the latter while Morupisi signed for the former. “You desperately wanted to paint a picture before this court that Okaile was instrumental in everything, that is why you said he signed the agreement, even though he never did. 

While engaging the witness, Mr Manewe produced a copy of the contract between R7 Group (PTY) Limited and Manor Squad Services. However the contract became a subject for debate as the copy that was filed by the prosecution appeared to be missing some of the details that were on the copy produced by the defence team.

“My instruction from my client is that you were given a full document and I put it to you that you have removed one of the pages to conceal its contents. This copy in my possession with all the pages was given to us by one of your team at the DCEC, Mr Eugene Wasetso,” said Mr Manewe. 

In his response to the defence attorney’s questions, Mr Setlaboshane said the DCEC did not prepare an inventory of the documents seized during investigations as it was required by the Criminal Procedure and Evidence Act. 

He said they do not maintain a chain of custody of records of documents seized from accused persons. Mr Manewe said failure by DCEC to maintain proper chain of custody of documents stating date seized to date of releasing them to court created a difficulty in establishing as to when the missing page disappeared. 

“You will agree with me that as a result of mishandling of pertinent documents, you are now stuck with a challenge of failing to account for the missing page,” said Mr Manewe. 

Mr Setlaboshane also concurred with the lead defence attorney that between May 17, 2017 and January 15, 2020, 16 transactions were made from Morupisi FNBB savings account to Manor Squad Services FNB account in South Africa paying for the vehicle valued at P495 076.80 (R639 988.99). Mr Manewe submitted ‘our version as the defence which the court must adopt, even though contradictory to that of the prosecution, is that the vehicle was fully purchased and fully paid from Manor Squad Services by R7 Group (PTY) Limited.’ 

Mr Setlaboshane also agreed that for an offence of corruption to stand before court, there must be valuable consideration. He said even though there was enough evidence before court that the vehicle at the centre of the case was bought by the accused person, the said vehicle was viewed as valuable consideration in all the charges, and that was why the accused persons were charged. 

However, the investigating officer disputed, Mr Manewe’s version on the issue relating to the vehicle. Mr Setlaboshane indicated that the contract made between Manor Squad Services and R7 Group (PTY) Limited was an afterthought to cover up a criminal act. 

In relation to the court order that was issued on October 7, 2014 barring all activities of the BPOPF activities, Mr Setlaboshane argued that signing of the contract with CMB by Morupisi on November 11, 2014 was wrong as it was not authorised as it was done when the board activities were suspended. 

Mr Manewe was of the contention that the order was fully complied with on October 20, 2014 after the submission of the names of employee trustee in the BPOPOF board. 

Even though he concurred with the defence attorney that the attorney general was the statutory and legal advisor to government but they (investigating team) did not seek their advice to establish as to whether the court order was still in force or seized to operate after October 20, 2014. 

The defence’s position is that there is evidence before court to the extent that whatever BPOPF did beyond October 20, 2014 was not in violation of the court order. Mr Setlaboshane also agreed with the defence attorney that there was no other court order that outlawed the signing of the agreement between BPOPF and CMB. 

Mr Setlaboshane also refuted that the DCEC called the then CEO, Lesedi Moakofhi to the offices persuading her to change her statement. He also indicated that Moakofhi was to be called by the prosecution as an accomplice witness as she was involved in the signing of the contract with CMB. 

 Mr Manewe said the prosecution was frustrated by Moakofi’s stance as she was not willing to engage in a scheme to incriminate Morupisi. “You were frustrated after she stood by her words and therefore changed against your initial plan to call her as an accomplice witness and instead charged her with corruption,” said Mr Manewe. 

Mr Setlaboshane also agreed with Mr Manewe that breach of court order was a criminal offence called contempt of court. 

Therefore, Mr Manewe wondered if Morupisi was in breach of court order of October 07, 2014 by signing on contract with CMB on November 11, 2014, why was he not charged with breach of a court order. He also wondered if contempt of a court order was a prerequisite for charging someone with corruption. 

Mr Manewe added that on August 22, 2014, BPOPF board of trustees made a resolution to award CMB a conditional contract pending finalisation of legal agreements. 

The investigating officer also concurred with the defence attorney that the tender process, seeking to engage asset manager on behalf of BPOPF started in January 2014, and was evaluated by the Finance and Investment Committee, who then made a recommendation to BPOPOF board of trustees to award the tender to CMB without the involvement of Morupisi. 

Mr Setlabosheng also agreed that the resolution to engage CMB was an anonymous decision of the BPOPF board of trustees. Mr Manewe said the defence team maintained that Morupisi was not in attendance when the resolution to award the tender to CMB was made. 

Under re-examination by the prosecution lead counsel, Ms Priscilla Israel, Mr Setlabosheng maintained that the contract between R7 Group (PTY) Limited and Manor Squad Services was a cover up of a criminal act because the tax invoice for the vehicle was issued on December 23, 2016, while the contract for purchase of vehicle was drafted in April 2017. “I believe it was meant to conceal the money that was diverted from CMB to Manor Squad Services,” he said. 

Particulars of the offence are that the first accused, whilst employed as Directorate of Public Service Management (DPSM) director, and holding the position of board chairperson for Botswana Public Officers Pension Fund (BPOPF), allegedly on or about November 11, 2014 at or near Gaborone, without the final resolution of the board, while the business of the board was on suspension by court order and in abuse of his public office, corruptly signed a contract with Capital Management Botswana as private equity managers and in the process obtained valuable consideration for himself and his wife’s company R7 Group (PTY) Limited. 

On the second account, Morupisi is accused to have on or about May 15, 2017 at or near Gaborone, acting together and in consent with wife Pinny in her capacity as R& Group (PTY) Limited director, received valuable consideration in the form of a gold Toyota Land Cruiser pickup valued at R630 988, 99. 

On the count of money laundering, Morupisi and Pinny, together with R7 Group (PTY) Limited are alleged to have on or about May 15, 2017 in Gaborone received and converted to their personal use, a Toyota Land Cruiser pickup bought from South Africa, whilst they knew or had reasonable grounds for knowing or suspecting that the said vehicle registered B587 BEW was derived or bought, in whole or in part, directly or indirectly from the commission of the offence. ends