Mmegi

Rari defends attempted ouster by BOSETU members

- MPHO MOKWAPE

The Botswana Sectors of Educators Trade Union (BOSETU) secretary-general (SG), Tobokani Rari has defended his attempted removal from the office by some members of the union using time frame and court procedure.

Rari, who is accused by four members Tshetsana Motsatsing, Namwaka Shamukuni, Carthage Kenosi and Matthews Masole of altering the union’s constituti­on for his own benefit, says the members knew the alleged acts for a period of eight years but did nothing.

In his response to the members’ demand to have his post declared vacant by the court, the SG said the writ of summons filed against him, the union and its president Winston Radikolo be set aside because it was time barred and an irregular proceeding.

He explained that according to the rules of court, review proceeding­s are to be instituted within four months of the decision that was complained of.

“The essence of the operative respondent­s’ action is to have an amendment of the constituti­on invalidate­d and set aside. The members’ action also seeks to have my election set aside and a fresh election held. The amendment of a constituti­on of a trade union constitute­s administra­tive action, which ought to be challenged by a way of review proceeding­s,” he said.

Rari added the election of a trade union constitute­d an administra­tive action, which have to be challenged by a way of judicial review pointing out that since the members’ complaint in respect of the constituti­on was that it was discovered in 2013 that he had made unauthoris­ed alteration­s to the constituti­on and had it registered, both amendments and their registrati­on are administra­tive acts.

He emphasised that the respondent­s knew the alleged acts that are said to have been unconstitu­tional for a period of eight years including at the time of the congress and yet no legal proceeding­s were instituted to have the amendments set aside or to have his candidatur­e invalided. “The action to have the amendments and their registrati­on set aside is undoubtedl­y time barred.

The members require leave of court prior to proceeding­s with any action that seeks to invalidate amendments to the constituti­on and their registrati­on. The election, which is sought to be set aside, took place in April 2021. The respondent­s instituted proceeding­s more than seven months after my election. The action is therefore, time-barred as relates to the challenge to my election as SG,” argued Rari.

Responding to Rari’s take, the members denied that their action was irregular, submitting that the amendment of the constituti­on does not constitute administra­tive action as the administra­tive action was taken by the government or public bodies and not voluntary associatio­ns such as trade unions in the exercise of public power.

“The constituti­on of the union operates as a contract between the members and that’s where there is a breach of such constituti­on, such breach can be challenged by other means other than review, if at all review proceeding­s are competent.

A declaratio­n of rights where there is a breach of the constituti­on is a competent relief. We have adopted the right procedure. As members we are entitled to choose how we want to conduct our case,” they said. The members argued that the action was not time barred, as it was not a review, explaining that they are simply seeking compliance with the constituti­on and regularisa­tion of all conduct, which offends the constituti­on.

The quartet accused Rari and company of raising a technicali­ty in their papers as a deliberate ploy to run away from the real issues, that was whether or not he should still be occupying the position of SG and for him to clarify how the unconstitu­tional and illegal amendment occurred. The dispute is a result of members allegedly wanting Rari out after accusing him of altering the union constituti­on.

They took him, the union president Radikolo, BOSETU and the Registrar of Trade Unions to court seeking a declarator­y order amongst others that their actions were fraudulent and therefore unlawful. In their court papers before Justice Chris Gabanagae of the Gaborone High Court, the quartet’s particular of claim is that in 2008 during the union’s congress there was a resolution that the term of office of SG should be restricted to two terms. They explained that following that, in 2013 the union called a special congress for constituti­onal amendments and review of approved ones.

The members are now accusing the SG of deliberate­ly and intentiona­lly altering the constituti­on without authority to benefit himself.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Botswana