Botswana’s foremost business magnate, Satar Dada’s signiture is on a recipt for the cheque that was paid by a Chinese contractor to the ruling Botswana Democratic Party (BDP) as kickback after being awarded a government tender.
Sunday Standard investigations have turned up an FNB cheque number 282-267 made out to the BDP by Precon Construction dated 06/10/2020 to the value of 200 000 and a recipt of the cheque bearing Dada’s signature indicating that he received it on the sane date.
At the time of going to press, the Sunday Standard could not establish if the BDP treasurer was aware that the donation to the party was a kickback.
The BDP treasurer is the latest big name to be implicated in the case in which President Mokgweetsi Masisi’s sisters are embroiled in a dispute with their nephew over the multi million pula public tender.
Court records show that the cheque in question worth P200 000 from Pre Con Construction was received by BDP’s treasurer. In his court papers, Masisi’s nephew, Pilane revealed how the Chinese contractor, Li informed him that for G&M Builders and Services “to win the tender, such undertakings had to be made to the Botswana Democratic Party as he has done before for Pre Con by paying some to B.D.P at tender stage.”
The tender in question was for the Goodhope Sub-District Water Supply worth more than P500 million and the contracting agency was Water Utilities Corporation (WUC).
Pre Con is a company owned by Li. According to court records, it has won a number of government water related tenders.
Chronicling the events that led to him and his aunties, Phadi Mmutle and Ketshidile Hlanze battling it out in the public domain, Pilane said sometime in 2020, Li acting and on behalf of G&M Building Services, offered to him 40 out of the 100 shares in the company. Pilane said he agreed to buy the said shares and as a result became a shareholder and a director in G&M Building Services.
The issued share capital of the company was then held as follows: Ontebetse Kgannyeng -40 shares, Kelebogile Monnaatshipi -20 shares and Olebile Joseph Pilane-40 shares.
Pilane said he was later appointed to the position of Managing Director of the company. Court papers show that Pilane and Li agreed that he would pay for the shares by preparing bids for tendering for various projects on behalf of the company. He said following tendering and submission of a bid, G&M Building Services in a joint venture with Tianyuan Construction won and was awarded a tender for construction of Goodhope Sub-District Water Supply Scheme contract worth more than P500 million.
According to court papers, “Soon after the tendering by the First Defendant (G&M Buildings Services), the Fourth Defendant (Li) started making some unreasonable demands on the Plaintiff (Pilane), which were not related to functions and duties of the First Defendant (G&M Buildings Services), which the Plaintiff (Pilane) rejected.”
One such demand, court records show, was for G&M Buildings Services “to make a payment of 5% of the contract sum to the Botswana Democratic Party.” Pilane said, on behalf of G&M Building Services, he declined the instruction.
Regarding how he was pushed out the shareholding of the company, Pilane said G&M Buildings and Services unlawfully dealt with his shares by ultimately transferring part thereof to the second defendant (Kelebogile Monnaatshipi) and another portion the third defendant (Tswela Khumo Ventures). The latter is reportedly a company owned by Pilane’s aunties.
Pilane said he has suffered special damages amounting to P17,5 million. “The defendants are jointly and severally liable to pay the Plaintiff the sum of P17 590 388.95,” Pilane’s lawyers MK Moesi &Co said.
In their papers before the court, Mmutle and Hlanze demand that Pilane responds to a number of questions including among others, “Who did the Plaintiff get the alleged shares from? Who did the Plaintiff take transfer of the alleged 40 shares from?”
The President’s sisters also demand “Copies of the share transfer documents are requested
from the plaintiff (Pilane).” According to court papers, Li’s relationship with Pilane harks back to the time when Li’s companies subcontracted Pilane’s company. As the relationship blossomed, Pilane was appointed to the position of Managing Director of G&M Building Services and offered shares by Li.
But now the President’s sisters demand to know; “Where and when did the Fourth Defendant and the plaintiff allegedly reach this agreement?” and if “Was the alleged agreement in writing? If so, a copy of the agreement is hereby requested.” They also demand that, “If it was verbal, the terms of such agreement are hereby requested.”
Pilane had also indicated in papers before the High Court that Li had agreed that he would pay for the shares in G&M Building Services by preparing bids for tendering for various works on behalf of G&M Buildings Services.
He stated that he was subsequently issued with a share certificate representing 40 shares as agreed. In compliance with the agreement between Pilane and G&M Buildings Services, Pilane was entrusted with the preparation of and took lead in the bids. But in the latest papers before the High Court, his aunties seek to know “How many bids did the plaintiff subsequently prepare on behalf of the First Defendant (G&M Buildings Services) in terms of the alleged agreement?”
