Seretse fights for frozen P82m assets
Local entrepreneur, Bakang Seretse is resolute in his fight to regain access to his P82 million seized assets saying they were forfeited without any tangible evidence. This week, he was back in court as the fight continued. Seretse was at the Court of Appeal (CoA) before Justice Singh Lakhvinder Walia seeking leave to pay security costs out of time to his pending appeal citing delay due to administrative issues.
The embattled businessman and his attorney, Kgosietsile Ngakaagae, sought leave in a case where the assets were long seized by the State during investigations related to the National Petroleum Fund (NPF) financial scandal and later the Gaborone High Court Judge Justice Omphemetse Motumise’s ruling that Seretse forfeits the properties as they were obtained through proceeds of crime.
The application for leave to pay security costs out of time is in relation to an appeal that is already pending before the same court where his main contention is that the judge was wrong to rule that the properties were proceeds of crime.
Submitting on the application, Ngakaagae said the main appeal for the assets had prospects because the evidence Justice Motumise used was based on hearsay and should have never been used.
“The investigating officer did not put anything before the court to authenticate his evidence other than the affidavit. No one was even called to confirm the origins of the said properties. The judge completely overlooked this issue,” he said. Ngakaagae explained that during the trial there were disputes of fact regarding the source of funds and his client provided documents of the origins and authenticity of the assets. He also noted that the judge dealt with the assets broadly saying even if they were proceeds of crime, the State ought to have shown how each was related to the crime and the judge taking note of that.
“It is possible that one could be proceeds of crime while the others are not. The judge could have been object-specific and determined which ones can be for forfeiture to the State and those not,” Ngakaagae said.
The State did not oppose the application. Seretse, who has had a back and forth with the State after being accused of being part of the ‘masterminds’ in the NPF scandal, lost his assets in September 2021 when Justice Motumise ruled that he should forfeit the properties as they were obtained through proceeds of crime.
In his grounds of appeal, Seretse said it was wrong for the judge to conclude that the properties were proceeds of crime. “The learned judge erred in concluding that the properties had been purchased with proceeds of crime when there was no evidence whatsoever, linking them to such,” reads the court papers.
He said the 27 assets in question ranged from various residential properties, luxury vehicles, furniture, jewellery, agricultural and gym equipment, which he contends that specific assets namely Weylandts furniture and fittings, gym equipment, and residential property in Gaborone West have been unjustly attributed to being the proceeds of criminal activity without evidence. Seretse further explained that the judge was wrong in concluding a plot in Gaborone West was bought for Kenneth Kerekang and his wife when there was no admissible evidence whatsoever to that effect.
Further on his appeal, he has argued that the judge was wrong in concluding that he, Kerekang and Basis Point connived and conspired fraudulently to divert money from the NPF. “He failed in not giving due weight to the fact that the evidence by the prescribed investigator as regards assets and their connection with allegedly diverted amounts was inadmissible hearsay,” further reads the papers. Seretse argued that it was surprising that the judge did not consider that the prosecution had on the previous occasion given a contradictory version as to how the properties subjected to forfeiture were obtained and did not resolve disputes of fact arising from pleadings in favour of them but resolving the same for the State.
The appeal clearly makes assertions of favouristim, insisting that arguments and evidence provided by the prosecution were given preferential treatment despite lacking substantial weight. “The judge erred in concluding that the consultancy contract was bogus when such indicated a dispute of fact that could only be resolved by oral evidence,” he said.
Meanwhile, Justice Motumise’s judgment said the court found that the fraudulent actions of Seretse and the former director of the Department of Energy in the then Ministry of Minerals and Water Resources, Kerekang cheated the public revenue.
He explained that the duo acted fraudulently in diverting funds from the NPF for private gain instead of purchasing oil stocks for Botswana Oil, according to the avowed purpose for which the funds were assigned.