Magosi ‘fakes’ gov’t documents

The Director-General (DG) of the Directorate of Intelligence and Security (DIS), Peter Magosi has been accused of forging official court documents. This is according to an explosive report seen exclusively by Mmegi. The report paints the head of the spy agency as someone who would achieve a mission at all costs even if it means committing perjury by faking official court documents. It is said Magosi does that to bring his enemies down.

In this instance, Magosi’s enemy is his second in command, Deputy Director-General operations Kenamile Badubi.

According to information gathered by Mmegi, Badubi, who has been serving suspension for allegedly leaking highly classified information concerning the security of the President, the DIS has since found him guilty and recommended his dismissal to the office of the Permanent Secretary to the President (PSP). Former Deputy Permanent Secretary Oduetse Koboto was the investigating officer in the matter against Badubi, where Magosi was the complainant.

Badubi, however, has maintained his innocence and instead submitted a chain of custody of the information relating to the armoured vehicles’ shipping and arrival dates. In his affidavit, Badubi said the only person he forwarded the video and information to was his boss, Magosi.

The DIS top boss has now made further damning allegations against his superior exposing the dirty dealings of the top spy. “The investigation reports furthermore presented a record, which shows that Koboto failed to maintain credibility of the investigations as he allowed some other people than himself to access the report and tempered with evidence therein,” Badubi stated.

Badubi continued to show that Magosi had forged official documents and tempered with evidence. “The report, as far as on June 3, 2021, the day it was handed to the complainant by the investigating officer, had no mention of any court order which was sought to allow Mascom Wireless (Pty) Ltd to provide cellular phone subscriber details of Isaac Kgosi. According to the report, Koboto’s list of annexures and other attachments do not feature the court order request and does not exist or was not part of his report.”

Blasting Magosi’s tactic to get him fired by all means necessary and exposing how Magosi undermines the judiciary of the country, his second in command further said a court order made by Magosi was immaturely doctored. “At the back of the report there was a suspicious document without annexure reference to the report. The suspicious document was written on a Mascom letter head purporting to be a court request to the DIS for the attention of Magosi. The Mascom court order request was requested by the complainant (Magosi) on July 6, 2021, more than a month after the investigations were closed and a report handed to him,” said Badubi. The Deputy

Director-General (Operations) further stated that the court order request by Mascom was collected on July, 8 2021 and contained subscriber details of Kgosi.

“However, this court order request is strange and unusual. Mascom cannot issue a court order request to the DIS and that attachment did not resemble a court order issued by the court of law in Botswana, which has government letterhead, and signed by a presiding officer or court registrar/clerk.

In any case, there is nothing called a court order request, rather it should have been a cellular phone request application, and then the court would issue a court order. In this regard, the complainant and Mascom conspired to illegally access and release cellular phone information of Kgosi,” said Badubi.

Badubi further indicated that for him it was clear that Koboto had no knowledge of the said court order request’s origins and purpose. He is convinced that Magosi played a major role in tampering with the investigation report, which came under his custody after being completed and handed to him by Koboto on June 3, 2021.

“The complainant has tampered with evidence, in particular the suspicious court order request alleged to have been sought from Mascom Wireless (Pty) Ltd, regarding subscriber details of Kgosi on July 8, 2021. This was a clear act of tampering with investigations by the complainant with a desperate desire to change contents of the original report by inserting the Mascom Wireless court order request to suit his chosen outcome. The investigating officer has never attempted to apply for a court order to be issued in this regard and neither mentioned it in his report,” he added.

Badubi pointed out that this unacceptable act of tanning with evidence has rendered the investigation report unreliable. He also said it lacks credibility, and therefore cannot be accepted.

The spy unit suspended Badubi and three others after President Mokgweetsi Masisi’s security detail was leaked and exposed to the public. The security breach involved leakage of classified information regarding the President’s armoured vehicles. In the matter, the DIS had decided to purchase the vehicles after it received intelligence threats to the First Citizen’s life in an operation led by the Deputy DG (Operations), Badubi.

In his response, DIS spokesperson, Edward Robert told Mmegi yesterday: “Since you are referring to some internal document belonging to the DIS or the operations of the DIS, it will be out of order for my office to proffer a comment on the matter. Internal matters of the organisation are for internal consumption.”

On allegations that the directorate has forged some court order, Robert indicated that, “the law is clear on what to do when seeking judicial authorisation for those investigations the authorisation is a requirement and as I know the directorate has allowed itself to be guided by the law.”

He noted that in the event that the directorate wishes to conduct an investigation of a personal or intrusive nature such as searches or interception of telephonic communications, Section 22 of the DIS Act says the DG or an officer authorised by the DG shall appear before a court of a senior magistrate or above of a Judge of the High Court and obtain an order to that effect.

He added: “Such applications are mostly done ex parte. If the presiding judicial officer is not satisfied with the motivation for such an order they will not grant the order.

This is the position of the law and anything contrary to this will be unlawful. And anyone who has evidence that the directorate has acted unlawfully should be free to approach the courts or law enforcement structures for reprieve.”