The state has been left with an egg on its face following a decision by High Court Judge Zein Kebonang on Monday to acquit and drop charges against the Directorate of Intelligence Services (DIS) operative – Wilhelmina Maswabi.
Maswabi, code named Butterfly in the Intel circles was facing two counts – possession of unexplained property and false declaration of passport. The state had also charged Butterfly with financing terrorism but dropped the charges in November 2020.
On Monday, Justice Kebonang of the Gaborone High Court ruled that the remaining charges be dropped and that Butterfly be acquitted. The ruling followed an application by the state some three weeks ago in which it sought a withdrawal of charges against Butterfly with an option to reinstate them at a later stage. Butterfly’s legal eagles however opposed the application and instead made an application that she be acquitted and discharged.
Given that the Butterfly case attracted international attention following, Kebonang stated in his ruling that the country has suffered ‘irreparable harm’.
“The country has suffered irreparable harm form the Butterfly prosecution. The state has committed a criminal act as the allegations are fabricated and outright false”, said judge Kebonang.
Kebonang’s Monday ruling subsequently means the state’s pending application at a lower court to withdraw the charges with an option to bring them back falls through.
The Butterfly case has also highlighted a big stand-off three state organs – the Directorate on Corruption (DCEC), the Directorate of Intelligence and Security (DIS) and the Directorate of Public Prosecution (DPP). At some point the trio bitterly fought over documents relating to the case as revealed by leaked audio tapes in early 2021.
It emerged from the tapes which recorded the meeting between representatives of the three agencies that the DCEC accused the DPP and the DIS of putting the horse before the cart by prematurely laying charges against Butterfly before concluding investigations.
During one of the heated meetings convened to discuss charges leveled against Butterfly, the DPP sought and demanded a docket relating to her case and other supporting documents from the DCEC. Replying, the DCEC said it did not have in its possession such documents or a docket.
The DCEC also insisted that the documentary evidence before it did not meet the threshold for prosecution. The DPP was not convinced insisting that it had sufficient evidence to build a solid case.
The DCEC team which had also informed its counterparts at DPP that it did not have a docket in possession accused the latter of tempting it into violating its own Act and warned that it would not accede to DPP’s demands. But the DPP insisted that there was a docket and sufficient evidence which cleared the bar for prosecution and secure conviction. Replying, the DCEC dared the DPP to go ahead with prosecution.
The DCEC also took issue with demands that it should probe false declaration of a passport which is one the charges leveled against Butterfly saying this did not fall within its mandate or purview.
As tensions between the three state agencies boiled over, it emerged that the DCEC had considered conducting an investigation into the controversial P100 billion Bank of Botswana cash heist.
But the investigation tapered-off after the DIS intervened and informed the DCEC that it should focus on the paper trail relating to local transactions and not those involving Bank of Botswana as they formed part of transactions that occurred outside the country.
