16 Jan 2024

Local businessman, Bakang Seretse is opposing a High Court judgement which forfeited his properties arguing that they are not related to the P60 million National Petroleum Fund (NPF) fraud case.

On Monday, Seretse’s lawyer, Mr Kgosietsile Ngakayagae, argued before a three-panel of the Court of Appeal judges that the properties were acquired from his client’s other sources of income. As such, he said the case against his client was unduly judged by the High Court Judge, Justice Omphitlhetse Motumise as he relied on hearsay evidence.

“This case fails the very most basic hearsay rule.

You cannot make judicial findings on non-admissible evidence,” Mr Ngakayagae said.

In 2021, Justice Motumise ruled against Mr Seretse and his company, Basis Point (Pty) Ltd that the properties in question amongst them, houses and top-of-the-range vehicles, were proceeds of crime relating to the NPF case.

The items listed for forfeiture included various vehicles such as Maserati Ghibli S, three Mercedes Benz, Lexus LX 450, Land Cruiser 5.6 V8, Toyota Hilux, plots in Extension 11, Lobatse, Gaborone West, farm and Rolex date just 41 watches, among others.

“It is denied that they are proceeds of crime. The state has failed to show evidence of how the said properties are related to crime,” Mr Ngakayagae said.

He said Justice Motumise’s judgement relied on the state hearsay evidence, which was inadmissible, adding that such information was not even authenticated by its originating sources.

However, the state attorney, Mr Dumisani Marapo from the Directorate of Public Prosecutions (DPP) said Mr Seretse and one Mr Kenneth Kerekang without being sanctioned by the Fund moved P60 million from the NPF account to a new account.

Such move, he said was done so that the NPF management committee could not track the account movement, adding that the reason given for opening a new account was that the money would be used to buy oil stock, which was never bought.

Mr Marapo said after being moved from the NPF account, the money was used for personal gains by the two and hence the state had demonstrated that the properties in question were proceeds of crime.

“If the court finds that the P60 million was tainted, then anything that comes out of the P60 million follow suit,” he said.

He also stated that the documents before the court were procedurally submitted as per the law, hence they were able to assist the court in dealing with the matter.

The case is before Justices Johan Froneman, Singh Walia and Edwin Cameron and judgement has been reserved for February 23. ENDS