Botswana Oil Limited, the government-owned petroleum company, has chosen not to take Botswana Energy Regulatory Authority (BERA) to court over the decision to turn down its application for exclusive import licence, its Chief Executive has disclosed.

In fact, the Willie Mokgatle-led institution has chosen the most diplomatic way of engaging with government on the matter, in a bid to find a harmonious solution. In an exclusive interview on Tuesday, Mokgatle, who is an old hand in the petroleum industry, said government, through the minerals resources, green technology and energy ministry has taken a decision to find solutions to issues related to the rejection of the licence by BERA.

According to the former Shell Botswana boss, the discussions will also ensure the two entities (Botswana Oil and BERA) who are from the same ministry avoid locking horns in a court of law. “I believe in the coming months a solution will be found,” said the optimistic Mokgatle.

BERA, the petroleum and gas regulator has given Botswana Oil  thumps down, after the latter applied to be the sole importer of petroleum and related services in Botswana, citing several factors.
The verdict, which was delivered by BERA Chairperson Bernard Ndove, keeps the status quo, which permits multinational companies in the sector such as Puma, Engen and Shell to participate in importing petroleum and petroleum products into the country.

The regulator is clear on its decision to deny Botswana Oil such exclusive licence. “Botswana Oil has not submitted a business case in support of the proposed changes in the current arrangements for importation of petroleum and petroleum products in the country, therefore making it difficult to assess the costs and benefits of the proposal,” said the authority in its 8th May 2018 decision. Accordingly, it is this failure by Botswana Oil not to state their financial readiness, that they are capable of being the sole importer, and with the absence of this information, the application is based on speculation, said BERA. By law, any application for this licence, Botswana Oil included, is supposed to provide evidence of their financial capability, but such information was not provided when the application was lodged.

Speaking to Botswana Guardian at the upmarket Rooms 52 hotel, Mokgatle indicated that, Botswana Oil is financially-ready to become the only importer of petroleum products in Botswana. He said, for every litre of petroleum products purchased by consumers, Botswana Oil is entitled to 17, 5 thebe. This allows the Gaborone-based company to go into the open market to raise cash if the need arises.

Mokgatle also revealed that the company, which has been registered privately, has also agreed with Omani Trading International to supply it with petroleum products on a credit basis. “This is a done deal (referring to the Omani),” he said confidently. Omani Trading is an Oman company which specialises in selling, marketing and supplying crude oil.  Botswana Oil, which was established in 2013 applied for the licence last month.

Subsequently a hearing was convened which was attended by various stakeholders, being players in the oil industry, experts, the public and business associations among others. The other reason for the rejection is that at the time of lodging the application, Botswana Oil was still negotiating with various stakeholders for agreements and contracts for oil supply. This did not put Botswana Oil in any good stead since their submission meant that their capacity is dependent on being given the exclusive licence, added BERA. “However, the requirement of Section 39(2) (d) is that at the time of application one must have capacity. A demonstration of capacity is a prerequisite of the issuance of the licence,” said Ndove. Botswana Oil does not have sufficient storage capacity to secure 60 days of uninterrupted supply, said Ndove.

“Contrary to the submissions made by the applicant, government’s planned petroleum products storage programme clearly indicates that the construction of the Tshele Hills project, expansion of the Francistown depot and development of the new storage depot will only fulfill the 60 days stock cover by the year 2020,” explained BERA.  As things stand, the domestic market consumes 1, 2 billion of litres of petroleum products on an annual basis, which amounts to 100 million litres of consumption per month, said the Botswana Oil CEO. 

Once granted an exclusive licence, Botswana Oil will be coming with an additional capacity of 10 million litres which will add to an already existing capacity of 20 million litres which is the combined capacity of all top five oil operating companies in Botswana, said Mokgatle. He said that they are willing to start with importing 50 percent of the total requirements of petroleum products in Botswana, before gradually moving to 100 percent. However, BERA has refused to accede to this proposal, arguing that once the licence is granted it will immediately exclude other players from importing.

The world’s largest diamond mining company, also Botswana’s main partner, De Beers, has invested US$10.5 billion towards expansion, maintenance and sorting diamonds ahead of negotiations for the Diamond Sales and Lease Agreement with Botswana.
De Beers has also committed to spend US$ 170m this year alone on marketing natural diamonds to consumers around the world.

The revelation comes as some form of relief as many pundits were worried by the De Beers’ announcement to launch a new company called Lightbox jewellery that’d be marketing laboratory grown diamonds. De Beers had also said it had invested
US$94million over four years in the company. However, De Beers Group Executive Vice President Corporate Affairs, David  Prager has  allayed these fears and assured Batswana and the neighbouring diamonds producing countries of Namibia and South Africa- whose diamonds too are for development - to be “encouraged and not worried” as nothing will replace natural diamonds.
He was fielding questions from Botswana Guardian.

Jwaneng appetite
Prager, flanked by Group Executive Vice President commercial and partnerships, Alessandra Berridge, said De Beers is committed to the long term diamond industry. “First, we have not launched Lightbox inspite of our optimism about the future of diamond industry. Consumers around the world spent a record of US$82 billion on diamond jewellery last year, of which USD 43bn was just in the United States alone, that is more than global and the American consumers have ever spent on diamond jewellery.
“We think the future of the diamond is really exciting, we are investing more than US$10 bn over the next five (5) years in maintaining mines, bringing new mines into production, expanding new mines, sorting diamonds, buying diamond technology to detect synthetic diamonds and marketing diamonds.

“We are going to spend US$ 170m this year alone on marketing natural diamonds to consumers that is more than what we spent in a decade and next year we will even spend more than that. So compare that to the investment we are making in Lab grown diamond, we are opening a production in lab grown Oregon in USA and over the next four (4) years, we will invest USD94m.

“There is really no comparison on the scale in terms of where our investment is and where our money is, but what we also know is for our USD10.5bn to be secure, it’s for the diamonds to have a market, not where consumers are confused on what is synthetic and what is natural, that is bad   for De Beers and Botswana”.

He said they hope that with Lightbox, it will provide consumers with clarity around what a lab grown diamonds are, and what occasion they should be used for. “There are two different things. It is public knowledge that expansion in Jwaneng is reaching the end of its viability. The timing of the Lightbox is not related to that, it is related to the research that has been done over the last 18 months and the issue that we seek to address in that is reaching a point where we believe we need to do something about it.
“Yes, we are obviously looking at the expansion of Jwaneng and Orapa in time, these are very much on the cards and a discussion between us is open”.

Engaged government
Prager said that Light box have had many engagements with the former president, Ian Khama. “We have also spoken and visited President Mokgweetsi Masisi and we have briefed his cabinet on two occasions. I think De beers and government are aligned in terms of strategy and in terms of our understanding that our partnership in Botswana is entering into a new face and we will be having that discussion in due course”.

Insightful Masisi
“I was part of the team that briefed President Masisi back in November whilst still a VP in the UK and we briefed him on the Lightbox strategy and what we saw going on in the market. I have to tell you, not only was he supportive and  encouraging, he was incredibly insightful  and some of the insights he gave us at the time really helped to form and shape the Lightbox strategy going forward”.
 Berridge  added  that , “Yes, we had a team member from government embedded  in the Lightbox team for the last 18 months or so, and we have kept government updated on the  research  that we have done and the strategy as we came with the announcement on 29th May.” 

No stone left unturned
De Beers took both Namibian President Hage Geingob and South African President Cyril Ramaposa and their teams through its strategy ahead of the announcement. “I think that across all three producer countries there is an understanding of the strategy and of the fact that ultimately from a natural diamond perspective,” said Prager.

But is the decision to go the lab grown diamonds way a strategy to wipe out competitors and control the market? Prager said; “We are following what our consumer research tells us, consumers tell us two things, that lab grown diamonds are different than natural diamonds, natural diamonds are for less most important things. Our view is, we have created this product, it has completely different story from natural diamonds and we put it in the market and it will compete and competition will hopefully give consumers what they want and others synthetic diamonds producers who want to compete with the product.”

Condemn synthetic
Prager vehemently denied that De Beers has ever condemned synthetic diamonds. “Let us be clear, De Beers did not condemn synthetic diamonds, who are we to do so? We never had problems with synthetic diamonds; we had a problem with synthetic diamonds that were marketed in a misleading way. We have invested tens of millions over decades to create screening technology that allows us to screen diamonds to determine which ones are real.

“Our view is that Lightbox is far from the natural diamonds, nobody has beaten us nor are we joining them. We think natural diamonds are the tremendous future. We are a natural diamond company and we are bullish on the future of the natural diamonds; USD 82 billion was spent on the diamond jewellery around the world last year that is a record”.

Tensions between Umbrella for Democratic Change (UDC) contracting partners, Botswana Movement for Democracy (BMD) and Botswana National Front (BNF) over constituency allocation are at their zenith.

It is a marriage gone wrong for the once darlings of the coalition who are now at each other’s throats over two constituencies- Moshupa/Manyana and Mmopane/Lentsweletau. When constituencies were allocated BMD and BNF were to hold bilateral talks on the two constituencies and decide who gets what.

Both parties are fighting tooth and nail to claim the constituencies. In fact, BMD has since indicated that the two belong to it and the party has already announced its candidates for the 2019 general election. On the other hand, BNF would not allow that.
What broke the camel’s back was last week’s pronouncement by BMD on the constituencies.

BMD leadership has made it clear that there is nothing to negotiate about the constituencies because it is a closed matter.
BNF is said to now be preparing to unleash war on BMD regarding some of the constituencies. The BNF would also not allow BMD to try and humiliate it by making pronouncement on matters that are still internal. The BNF is said to also be planning to reclaim Gabane-Mmankgodi which is now under the watch of the BMD.  BNF Secretary General Moeti Mohwasa this week quashed claims by BMD.

“The BNF would like to correct the picture that is being created that a resolution has been reached regarding the impasse over the allocation of Moshupa-Manyana and Ntsweletau-Mmopane constituencies as the reports coming from the recent BMD press conference seems to suggest.

“While it is not our position to publicly discuss matters that are a subject of discussion with our partners, in the interest of ensuring that the nation and our members are not confused and fed with wrong information, we are compelled to set the record straight,” Mohwasa said.

Giving a brief history regarding the constituencies Mohwasa explained that after the completion of the Talks with BCP, the old UDC (which then comprised the BMD, BNF and the Botswana People’s Party) got 40 constituencies while the BCP got 17.  
At a meeting held to divide the constituencies amongst the old UDC members, the BNF and BMD felt entitled to both Moshupa/Manyana and Ntsweletau/Mmopane, said Mohwasa who is also UDC Head of Communications. “A decision was then made that the allocation of these constituencies be a subject of bilateral (talks) between the two parties. 

“It was however not possible to engage the BMD because of the leadership challenges it had then until just recently, which we are all aware of. Ourselves and the BMD hold two divergent and strong views regarding who should manage these constituencies on behalf of the UDC. For the BNF, at present, the two constituencies remain un-allocated.

 “We believe a sober engagement between the two parties can assist resolve this matter and avoid the fermenting of tensions within the UDC, which regrettably is the case currently,” stated Mohwasa.  He revealed that the holding of bi-laterals by parties within the UDC on matters of common concern will help strengthen unity.

 Mohwasa maintained that in acknowledgement of the importance of bi-laterals, the BNF central committee at its most recent meeting, resolved to hold bi-laterals with all its partners within the UDC and the labour federations immediately after the forth-coming Annual Conference, to be held under the theme, “Ensuring BNF Unity Now and UDC Victory in 2019”.

 “We would like to appeal to all our partners within the UDC to always engage each other meaningfully and avoid making solo and arbitrary decisions as this has the potential of destabilising the People’s project.
Dealing with our differences in such a manner can lead to others taking the same route, which could lead to anarchy.  “We will not agree all the time, but what is important is how we handle our contradictions. The BNF calls upon its members to remain calm and avoid any acts that have the potential to tarnish the good image of the UDC. We remain hopeful that a lasting solution will be found,” said Mohwasa.

BMD Secretary General Gilbert Mangole maintained that there is no issue. According to Mangole, BNF has 22 constituencies as per the announcement by UDC leader Advocate Duma Boko. He indicated that should the disputed constituencies be given to BNF it would now mean they have 24 constituencies and BMD would have 11 constituencies.

“We have written to BNF stating that they have to make a formal request if they want us to give them the two constituencies just like what Botswana Congress Party did. Without that there is nothing to talk about because those constituencies are for BMD,” he said. Mangole wondered why the BNF would now also want to claim Gabane-Mankgodi and Gaborone Bonnington South.

Botswana Democratic Party (BDP) Gaborone South Constituency is marred by controversy as campaign teams jostling for the area clash on a collision course, Botswana Guardian has learnt.

The constituency will pit Gaborone- based lawyer Meshack Mthimkhulu with businessman Monametsi Kalayamotho in the contest for party representation. The party top brass have also been implicated in the matter as they are accused of having dumped Mthimkhulu for Kalayamotho.

Botswana Guardian understands that Mthimkhulu, who joined BDP from Botswana National Front (BNF) after the 2014 general election was promised that like most of the new recruits he would not be subjected to the process of Bulela Ditswe. Mthimkhulu contested the 2014 general election as an independent candidate after he lost BNF primary elections.

It is alleged that Mthimkhulu was at the time recruited to the BDP by Mokgweetsi Masisi who chaired the Communications and International Relations Committee and promised a clear ride as area Member of Parliament Kagiso Molatlhegi would not be seeking re-election.  Mthimkhulu and Kalayamotho are said to be close to President Masisi but the wind now seems to be blowing in the direction of Kalayamotho.

While having enjoyed the blessing from the party leadership both from branch level to Central Committee, tables turned against Mthimkhulu this year when Kalayamotho made his way into the constituency. It is alleged that Kalayamotho was tipped to challenge Annah Mokgethi who was recruited from the Botswana Congress Party (BCP) but he was convinced to relocate to Gaborone South a constituency he grew up in. This was because Mokgethi was also allegedly promised not to be subjected to primary elections.
Now the opposing teams of Mthimkhulu and Kalayamotho are firing from all cylinders in a bid to have one of the candidates fall during vetting.

The duo has successfully managed to forward names for expression of interest to contest in the constituency before closing date a fortnight ago. Vetting is ongoing in the constituencies that would go for primaries in August this year including Gaborone South.
At the centre of controversy are accusations from both camps of campaigning before time.

Letters are flying from one office to the other as a smear campaign by both teams. Mthimkhulu’s team has written letters to BDP Secretary General Mpho Balopi complaining that Kalayamotho, who transferred his membership from Gaborone Bonnington North to Gaborone South, engaged in early campaign by hosting activities at Old Naledi and branding and distributing t-shirts to constituents with the aim of luring them to vote for him in August.

Letters seen by this publication also question Kalayamotho’s membership transfer. The complainants argue that they sense the transfer was done under dubious circumstances. A recent Entrepreneurship Summit which Kalayamotho hosted at Old Naledi and Bontleng Halls on 17 May 2018 to reach out to the unemployed has also been cited as one of his campaigns for votes. He is said to have resorted to using such a stunt because he has arrived in the constituency late and is only using financial muscle to gain popularity.

On the other hand, Kalayamotho’s team has hit back and written to Branch Committee accusing Mthimkhuku’s team of applying underhand tactics to canvass for votes. Mthimkulu’s team is said to be campaigning by organising activities such as soccer tournaments and buying alcohol for constituents in exchange for them to register so as to vote for him.

It is also alleged that a WhatsApp Group page - a platform the BDP has indicated should not be used for campaigns - has been opened and is being used for campaigning. Candidates for the August 2018 Bulela-Ditswe will only be allowed to campaign after 13th July 2018 and will be allowed to use only house to house campaigns.

Kalayamotho told this publication that it would be against BDP rules and regulations to address the media on such matters. He stated that only the branch committee and secretary general would be in a position to comment. Regarding his transfer, he said he worked within the party rules and Branch leadership can attest to his claims. He told this publication that people are quick to run to the media to discuss internal affairs, which is wrong.

Mthimkhulu refuted claims that he has been campaigning in the constituency. He labelled this as a smear campaign to have him vetted out. “I have not carried myself in any manner that violates the BDP Constitution and or Rules and Regulations. I am also not aware of any complaint against me because even the Branch Committee. has not notified me,” said Mthimkhulu who referred further inquiries to the branch committee
Gaborone South Branch Chairman Alfred Moatlhaping said Kalayamotho followed proper channels to have his membership transfer. He said the complaints about Kalayamotho’s campaign were conveyed to the central committee and not the branch committee. “We would not address a matter that was not brought before my committee.

Those people flouted our rules and there is no how we could help them as the branch. So we will wait for the Central Committee to undertake its investigations and report to us the findings,” said Moatlhaping.
He pointed out that he has been made aware of a letter of complaint from Kalayamotho by the Branch Secretary. Moatlhaping said he has not seen the letter, adding that he would know the contents of the letter this week during a Branch Committee meeting.  Balopi has indicated that all complaints are directed to lower structures to address so that the central committee could deal with such matters at a higher level as appeals.

Balopi has revealed recently that the party’s Political Education and Election Committee is engaged in mass registration across the country and attending to constituencies that are marred by controversies regarding registration and campaigns. He said this is to deal with claims that some of the structures are captured by some of Bulela-Ditswe candidates.

Molatlhegi won the constituency in 2014 with 3,872 votes, followed by Murray Dipate of the Umbrella for Democratic Change (UDC) with 3,629, Akanyang Magama of Botswana Congress Party (BCP) with 2,318 and Mthimkhulu, then an independent candidate coming last with 1,475 votes.

Members of Parliament have welcomed the Data Protection Bill presented by Minister for Presidential Affairs, Governance and Public Administration Nonofo Molefhi this week.

The MPs further called for enactment of other laws such as Freedom of Information Act. The minister was also cautioned about abuse of power by government to access individuals’ personal information.
Presenting the Bill Molefhi stated that the Constitution of Botswana guarantees at Section 9, the right to privacy as one of the fundamental rights and freedoms of an individual. Access to services from service providers often results in the service providers compiling personal data, some of which is sensitive personal data, he said.  The minister told Parliament that this Bill seeks to regulate the protection of personal data and ensure that the privacy of individuals in relation to their personal data is maintained.

“Personal data is information that relates to an identifiable individual, which individual can be identified directly or indirectly by reference to an identification number or to factors specific to the individual’s physical, physiological, mental, economic, cultural or social identity.  “On the other hand, sensitive personal data is, personal data relating to an individual, which reveals among other things, his or her racial or ethnic origin, political opinions, religious beliefs, sexual life and personal financial information.

The main object of the Data Protection Bill is to protect all personal data and to provide for instances where it may be processed,” he explained.  Molefhi added that the Bill further provides for security safeguards required in the processing of data and establishes an Information and Data Protection Commission whose main function is to protect the personal rights of individuals with regards to their personal data.

Debating the Bill MP for Gaborone Central Dr. Phenyo Butale observed that in most instances the Data Protection Laws are often enacted after a country has enacted a Freedom of Information Law. He explained that the reasoning for this is that data protection is often misconstrued by some Governments more especially Governments that like secrecy over transparency, they always think that Data Protection Laws are secrecy laws.

Dr Butale said the chronology is made in this way so that “as you promote transparency, you then have a legal instrument that protects personal information”. Samuel Rantuana of Ramotswa said even though he welcomes the Bill, data protection breaches are not well articulated.  “If the breaches are done (sic), what are we going to do? There should be clearly laid out data protection breaches. This data protection should not be only against private or other individuals. Are individuals protected against the Government that can use this information to harass its own people?” asked Rantuana.

He said the law once enacted should not be like the one used by Ministry of Nationality, Immigration and Gender Affairs which has created problems where people were being traced back to their grandparents because they come from Zimbabwe and South Africa. “We did not let them renew their Omang and that is very wrong,” the legislator said. Rantuana stated that the Government can harass its own people from their individual data.

MP for Palapye Moisiraela Goya said one of the good attributes of the Bill is that it talks about setting or establishing an Information and Data Protection Commission. Goya pointed out that this Commission is meant to protect rights of individuals with regard to their personal details.

“If you look at the market today, if you go into shops and other outlets where they provide service, they use machines called speed points. These speed points are supplied or provided by banks to these merchants. These machines work through an Internet Service Provider (ISP) but the question is, how does one’s PIN get protected”?  Goya who is also Assistant Minister of Investment, Trade and Industry stated that one does not know whether this PIN has not been shared with Internet Service Providers because it is the banks who supply these speed points to the merchants, so individual customers can do their transactions through these machines. 

MP for Gaborone Bonnington South Ndaba Gaolathe pointed out that the legislation seems somewhat silent on the area of oversight, particularly oversight in relation to Parliament. According to Gaolathe there needs to be explicit reference to how there would be management of potential abuse, because the regulator will have powers to make decisions and grant permission for studies. “How do you have an oversight regime and dispensation, to ensure that at the overall level those powers are not abused? There is always reference to, ‘for security reasons we would not allow such data to be given to other authorities.’

There has to be an objective measure of what security reasons means, as it is done internationally. There are new threats to privacy and being able to enforce privacy, there are new issues of the extent to which technology allows you to interact so many times”.

Tensions are reaching boiling point as the deadline for the repatriation of the Namibian refugees held at Dukwi refugee camp to their native country draws nearer.

The refugees have until 11th of July (less than two weeks) to return to their country. But fresh information gathered by this publication indicates that some of the refugees at Dukwi Camp are refusing to sign for voluntary repatriation. This comes after some of their colleagues were arrested last week in Gaborone.

The 12 refugees who presented a petition to Southern African Development Community (SADC) on behalf of others at the camp have been detained since Tuesday last week. They were held at Molepolole Centre for Illegal Immigrants and later transported to Francistown Centre for Illegal Immigrants (FCII) where they are currently detained. There are claims that officials at FCII and Dukwi Camp are reluctant to release the detained Namibians to the camp on fears that they might incite others at the camp not to sign for voluntary repatriation pending intervention by SADC. It is alleged that SADC is currently considering the request for intervention.

About 900 Namibians remain at the camp. They are mostly those who call themselves Caprivians. The Namibian government is said to have managed to repatriate about 3,000 since 2000. The refugees stated in their petition to SADC, that they will only return home if the Namibian government lifts the ban on the United Democratic Party (UDP), which is led by the exiled leader of the separatist movement in the former Caprivi now Zambezi region of Namibia, Mishake Muyongo.

UDP had formed a military wing, the Caprivi Liberation Army, which carried out deadly secessionist attacks at Katima Mulilo on 2 August 1999. The refugees now want SADC to intervene and create a platform where Namibian Government would welcome them back to the country as UDP members. They also want an undertaking from the government that they would not face any criminal charges especially treason.

In an interview at FCII Felix Kakula representing the refugees said no one is communicating anything to them. He explained that they (12 of them) have been detained since Wednesday last week following their arrest. Kakula further stated that SADC has also not responded to their request. He fears that the deadline for the repatriation is drawing near. “It is true that some people are refusing to sign for voluntary repatriation. The only reason is what we have already communicated to SADC. This is a political situation that needs political intervention.

We still maintain that we would not leave for Namibia until they agree to our terms. We have been here detained since last week. We suspect they would not take us to the camp because they fear we might influence more of our people not to sign for the repatriation,” Kakula indicated.

He revealed that they are currently working with Botswana Council of Churches (BCC) who are facilitating through a lawyer for their release from detention. BCC has called on President Mokgweetsi Masisi to reconsider the 11 July 2018 deadline to ensure that the refugees’ repatriation is within the spirit of safety and peaceful settlement of all returnees, with particular reference to the issue of security clearance of the 16 political leaders. The council has since engaged a lawyer to assist with the release of the 12 refugees from the FCII.

UNHCR Chief of Mission, Arvind Gupta told this publication that there is nothing they could do regarding the arrested Namibians because at the time of their arrest they were not refugees. He said their status as refugees was no longer recognised. “Their stay in the Dukwi Camp is for us to assist with facilitation for their repatriation back to their country following the declaration of the cessation clause. Botswana has enforced a cessation clause with respect to the status of Namibian refugees living at Dukwi, which was invoked in 2015. So if they leave the camp Botswana Government has the right to enforce any law that is applicable.

Their refugee status does not exist anymore,” he stated. Botswana Government has not made any statement since the petition and arrest of the refugees.
SADC Head of Regional Early Warning Centre and Representative of Namibian Government Habib Kambanga who received the petition told this publication this week that he could not comment on the matter because at the time he received the petition he was just acting as the relevant officer was out of the country.

Kambanga stated that all he knows is that a letter has been drafted to both Namibian and Botswana Government requesting for a bilateral discussion on the matter.
“Currently I do not know the status of the matter because after the drafting of the letter I also travelled out of Botswana. As SADC we want the matter resolved,” said Kambanga referring further inquiries to Dr Malepa- Director for Organ on Politics, Defence and Security.

Dr Malepa also referred the matter to SADC Head of Public Relations Barbara Lopi who was not available for comment at press time. Botswana’s Minister of Defence Justice and Security Shaw Kgathi revealed that Namibian President has sent a delegation to Dukwi Camp to talk to the refugees. “The Namibian President has sent three ministers and some traditional leaders to speak to Namibians at the camp. We would be going there to meet them and the meeting would probably be Thursday or Friday. We are hoping for a fruitful engagement,” said Kgathi on Wednesday this week.

Namibia’s Commissioner for Refugees in the Ministry of Home Affairs, Likius Valombola, said that they have no communication about Namibians detained in Botswana and are only aware of the 910 refugees who have been cleared “as per current communique”. Valombola also pleaded ignorance on some refugees from Caprivi (now Zambezi) Region in north-eastern Namibia who apparently demand that they be welcomed to Namibia and be recognised as United Democratic Party (UDP) members without being charged with treason. 

“We do not know about UDP members and we do not know that there are still activities going on, unless they reactivated. We cannot dwell on that,” he said. The Namibian government’s position on the current development with regards to refugees at Dukwi refugee camp in Botswana is that it is ready to receive them back home “with open hands”. “There is no point for them to live in Botswana as refugees as per the tripartite,” said Valombola. He added that the Namibian government received a communiqué from SADC Secretariat on 20 June 2018 and the Ministry of Home Affairs and Immigration was consulting with relevant stakeholders on the matter.

“The Government of Namibia is prepared to receive its citizens in safety and dignity,” he pointed out, saying that upon registration for voluntary repatriation, they would be issued with repatriation packages such as building materials and national documents for those who do not have.

According to Valombola, the returnees would be treated like others who have already been repatriated by engaging local stakeholders for resettlement and re-integration purposes back to their various communities. “They will participate in the socio-economic development programmes available in their constituencies and communities without any discrimination or persecution. With regard to school going population, they will definitely be admitted in their respective levels of schooling,” said Valombola.
As per the Tripartite Commission agreement, the UNHCR will give a voluntary repatriation package, which includes money and food for three months, while also monitoring and supervising the voluntary repatriation from the country of asylum to the country of origin.
Valombola warned that those who fail to register for voluntary repatriation would unfortunately forfeit the repatriation packages.

The Commissioner dispelled fears that those who return would be persecuted or imprisoned, saying that “the Government of Namibia is resolute in ensuring that they return in a dignified manner and integrated into their communities without fear from persecution.” He said before the deadline of the 11 July 2018, Botswana hosted 916 Namibians and immediately when the deadline was announced, seven former Namibian refugees registered for voluntary repatriation and were received on the 14 June 2018.

“They are now with their families well integrated into their communities in Zambezi Region,” he noted. Valombola said that those who were not cleared by the Tripartite Commission should write a letter to the President of Namibia Hage Geingob, indicating their circumstances and their intent to return to Namibia.(Magreth Nunuhe is Senior Business Reporter with Southern Times)

Two residents of Letlhakane are pointing a finger at Boteti East Member of Parliament Sethomo Lelatisitswe for ‘stealing’ their land in 2014.

Seventy-nine old granny, Gaboitsiwe Maphane and Franz Tsietso, 53, are on a mission to go and see President Masisi over the issue. In an interview with Botswana Guardian last week, Maphane said the MP knew the land was theirs and that he took advantage of her old age and connived with Ngwato Land Board to take her piece of land at Motatawa.

“I voted for him thinking he was going to improve my life. Little did I know he was going to cheat me and steal from me,” said Maphane.
She wrote to Ngwato Land Board on September 15, 2015 appealing decision taken by Letlhakane Sub-Land Board concerning the allocation of a ploughing field to Lelatisitse.

In June the same year the Sub Land Board resolved to dismiss her, saying she does not have the right over the land concerned. She was advised that there was enough space next to her field which she could use, and concluded by giving the MP the rights saying he was the rightful owner.

 Botswana Guardian is in possession of documents between the parties, dating back from 2014. A document from the Land Tribunal in Palapye in 2015 says the matter was dismissed on the basis that she does not have rights over the land.
“In terms of the 1st respondent (Ngwato Land Board)’s Allocation Policy of 2011, at clause 13.0, ‘No claim shall be entertained in respect of a letlotla or lelota allocated by the Kgosi/Land Board and was abandoned for a minimum period of five years.”

Maphane had said that she last resided on the land in 1999-2000, which the Land Tribunal argued was 15 years ago. It also stated that Maphane’s claim is for a piece of land which they used purely as their homestead while at the lands contrary to the Botswana Land Policy (clause 60 VII) that ‘Farmhouses (mekgoro) will be situated within arable fields and agricultural holdings.’

In her letter to Francistown Land Tribunal dated November 10, 2016, Maphane said she had given no written or verbal agreement to release the land from her ownership, and that the land was rightfully hers. She revealed that she had owned the six-hectare plot since 1958 through the time of receiving a land grant in 1988.

Tsietso said that the Land Board took their ploughing fields homestead and allocated them to the MP. He told BG News that his intention was to register the homesteads as the village expands and submitted an application in 2003 to Ngwato Land Board.

Land overseer speaks
Serumola Modirwagale, 85, told The Land Tribunal that the MP came to him in 2014 asking him for a signature, and informed him to go and consult Maphane and Tsietso ‘as he knew they had ploughing field homesteads on the other side of the road.’
He told this publication, however, that he did not know then that the MP had already started acquiring the land with the Sub Land Board.

He said Leatisistswe tricked him into signing papers he did not understand since they were written in English. “Ideally, they were supposed to be together when the Land Board allocated him the land. He stole their land,” he said angrily.
Last year The Land Tribunal in Francistown ruled in favour of the MP, citing that he is the rightful owner of the plot as he followed the procedure.
 The complainants failed to appeal the case. “The only way is for us to approach the president. A young man used his power to cheat us,” said Maphane.

MP’s response
In response, MP Leatisitswe said it was all a political gimmick meant to discredit him. He said that he knew the faces behind plans to destroy his political career and that he would not be fazed.

“Those people are insignificant and I know them,” he said.
He said that the plots in question were a barren land and that contrary to what the complainants are saying, their fields are 2km from his land.
“It was a bush and I started developing it in 2014. Even after complaining and appealing, those complainants have been rejected by the courts,” he said.

Mascom Wireless Botswana who recently lost with costs a case in which it had sought a review of the lawfulness of a directive promulgated by the Botswana Communications Regulatory Authority (BOCRA), is far from giving up, Botswana Guardian can reveal.

Mascom took the matter to Gaborone High court before Justice Michael Leburu complaining about BOCRA’s decision to regulate the Mobile Termination Rates (MTRs) in the country. Their view is that the rates as set by BOCRA are very low and wants them increased. But, BOCRA and telecommunications experts see this differently as they believe Mascom simply wants to protect their interest and profit at the expense of the consumer.

Having dismally failed to convince the court, Mascom has decided to exploit another avenue – appealing to minister of Transport and Communications, Kitso Mokaila in a move that legal experts believe should have been their first step before challenging BOCRA in court.But despite having thought they had a good case, they found Mokaila unshakable as he turned down their request stating that the court has made its decision on the matter.

Minister Mokaila confirmed that Mascom has appealed to him. Speaking to BG News Mokaila said, “Yes, I can confirm that Mascom has contacted and appealed to me by way of a letter from their Chief Executive Officer, Jose Cicero who wrote requesting for my intervention and overturning the ruling.  
“I have since replied them and in my response I told them that the court has pronounced the judgment and there is nothing I can do and the only way out for them will be to appeal to the Court of Appeal,” said Mokaila. It seems Mascom will not give up until they get a favourable response if their Chief Communications and PR Officer, Tebogo Lebotse- Sebego’s response is anything to go by.

Confirming that it is true they appealed to Mokaila, Lebotse-Sebego said that was in line with the Communications Regulatory Authority Act. “We made an appeal to the Honourable Minister Onkokame Kitso Mokaila, seeking his intervention, in what we perceive to be an uneven playing field created by a situation, unheard of in any competitive mobile market, local or international, where the same retail service is regulated for the different competitive providers at different price ceilings,” she said.

According to Lebotse-Sebego Mascom’s plea to the Minister was borne out of a rejection by BOCRA for Mascom to review its retail offering, even though such a review would still retain Mascom’s offer as the lowest tariffs for national calls in the market.
Mascom also accused BOCRA for not properly consulting. But BOCRA demonstrated to the court that before making up its final decision, they conducted a study and consultation for about 14 months as well as making presentation with the operators on a one-on-one basis showing them the information study.

Mascom has the largest subscriber base when compared to other operators - Orange Botswana and BTCL - through its brand beMOBILE.  The BOCRA directive clearly stipulates charges that mobile network operators charge each other for network interconnection.
In 2016 BOCRA study found the rates to be at 29 thebe.

The study determined that 29 thebe was way above costs and directed operators to reduce over a period of two years. The first reduction was on 1st June 2017 reduced from 29 to 22 thebe and the final reduction was on 1st June 2018 to 13thebe per minute.
This is what Mascom did not like. They took the matter to court, but Justice Leburu dismissed the case stating amongst others that the decision by BOCRA is within the context of its decision-making powers and demonstrates that a reasonable and rational choice and decision was made by BOCRA.

Mascom had wanted the court to determine if BOCRA had acted in accordance with its statutory obligations to take regulatory decisions in the open, transparent, accountable, proportionate and objective manner in terms of the Communications Regulatory Authority Act when it issued the regulatory directive No.1 of 2017 on the 24th March 2017 determining the charges that the mobile network operators have to charge each other for network interconnections,.

Mascom Wireless felt that the BOCRA directive - which set Mobile Termination Rules that were to apply on 1st June 2017 and also directed three operators to review their prices to remove the Off Net Mobile voice calls by 1st June 2018 to cost 13thebe - was illegal, irrational, and improper and wanted it reviewed and set aside.

Justice Leburu dismissed the application with costs at attorney to client scale inclusive of costs related to engagement of Senior Counsel. 

There is new twist in the long-standing dispute between the Debswana Mining Company and the Department of Environmental Affairs (DEA) over installation of full body ray scanners.

Debswana had taken DEA to court to compel the department to give approval for installation of the machines. While DEA had not filed opposing papers the case was scheduled for status hearing last week Thursday. It has since emerged that the department had a day before the case came for status hearing, written letter of approval for a go ahead.

Now Botswana Mine Workers Union (BMWU) has entered the fray and is tomorrow (Saturday) scheduled to petition Debswana Mining Company over its intention to install the controversial low dose full body X-ray scanners (Scannex) at its mines.
The installation of the machines has been marred by controversy for the past five years when the diamond mining company revealed that it would be installing the machines with the aim of protecting the precious stones from theft. The petition by the union follows the decision by DEA authorising installation of the machines.

The diamond mining giant got a conditional license some years back from the Department of Radiation to install the low dose full body X-ray scanner (Scannex) in various locations at the Jwaneng, Orapa, Letlhakane and Damtshaa mines. Debswana had submitted a Draft Scoping Report to DEA. The DEA had initially questioned whether statistics by Debswana imply a decline in cases of diamond theft and if it also suggests the success of the current security measures.

In an interview with Botswana Guardian this week BMWU President Jack Tlhagale said they are still against the installation of the machines. He explained that they are aware that a day before a court case by Debswana challenging the delay by DEA the department granted the authorisation for installation. Minister of Environment, Natural Resources, Conservation and Tourism Tshekedi Khama was at one point accused of blocking the authorisation. In his defense, Khama stated that all he wanted was for proper procedure to be followed indicating that he would not endanger the lives of miners who are Batswana. The minister explained that as soon as Debswana avails all the necessary documentation as per the request his ministry would grant the authorisation.

“The case was to be heard on June 21st 2018 and a day prior, a letter of authoirastion was issued. What also worries us is that for a long time we have been questioning the installation of these machines but we were not made part of the court case.
“We could have made our case known before court why we believe the machines should not be installed. This is why we are petitioning the company at both Jwaneng and Letlhakane mines where we expect Managing Director Balisi Bonyongo or representatives to receive the petition,” said Tlhagale.

Under “dose limitations” DEA had asked Debswana to stipulate the number of times employees are expected to be exposed to these scans in the different areas of the mine per day “in order to determine the possibility (or lack thereof) of exceeding the limits”. Pregnant women and individuals under the age of 16 are exempted from exposure to the scanner.

The union President said Debswana has failed to bring concrete proof from external experts to indicate that a small dose of ionising radiation is not harmful. “We engaged experts whom in their report expressed fear that exposure to ionising radiation could result in cell death, cell damage, cancer and that prolonged exposure could lead to death. Botswana Mine Workers Union is against the use of Scannex,” said the president.

Debswana has justified the use of Scannex saying the physical search methods and surveillance of personnel at work areas have proven insufficient. “Since diamonds are portable, and easily concealable, a diamond thief can conceal the stones in body orifices such as nostrils, ears, mouth, navel, penis (urethra and foreskin) or vagina or the rectum,” Debswana stated in its draft scoping report to DEA under the subhead “rationale for the project.”

Tlhagale argued that using South Africa and Namibia as success stories of the use of this technology for over 20 years is not justifiable. “Because those machines were installed by apartheid regime. We also know how the regime treated people so that is not justifiable. As we have said before and explained by experts the Radiation Protection Regulations of 2008; Regulation 37 (5) requires that records of workers be preserved until the worker reaches 75 years, and for not less than 30 years after termination of work involving occupational exposure.

“Where are we going to get records of such people? Who is going to be monitoring them because obviously Debswana would not be doing that? People would get sick after having retired from the mines and die without any records being kept. We are worried about this situation because our members are going to be subjected to these machines every day when they knock off,” he explained.
Tlhagale said they would also petition the company on the 3 percent salary increase which was agreed in 2016. He said they want a new increase to be negotiated. “We had agreed to the 3 percent because at that time it was public knowledge that our diamonds were not doing well. Currently things have improved,” posited Tlhagale.

In the agreement between the parties there is a clause that stipulates that parties can review if inflation goes beyond 5 percent. However, Tlhagale argues that that should not be the only factor that is being considered. Minister Khama could not be reached for comment this week as he was said to be busy with Sothern African Customs Union (SACU) summit while DEA Director Charles Mojalemotho was said to be in Denmark on official duty.

Debswana’s Corporate Affairs Manager Matshidiso Kamona said Debswana has not received an approval to install Scannex machines. “We can confirm that we have received an official notification of a planned mass demonstration by the Botswana Mine Workers Union. According to the note addressed to the Managing Director of Debswana, Mr. Balisi Bonyongo, the petition relates to unsatisfactory conditions of service in general and it has no reference to Scannex,” she said in her short email response.

Water Utilities Corporation (WUC) on Wednesday shut down the Borolong plant in Maun, to start the works of replacing the malfunctioning Actifio Clarifier pump and filter unit.

Acting Corporate Communications Manager at WUC, Beauty Mokoba told Botswana Guardian that the new works at the plant are expected to resolve the discerning colour currently observed in Maun. She said the works would be done jointly with the plant contractor, Veolia Water Technologies and is expected to complete mid this month.

Mokoba said WUC procured the components and equipment required to undertake the works from South Africa at the tune of P1.4 million. She said that Delta water tends to be different from perennial and ephemeral rivers as the water is subject to drying up and flooding.

She said this consequently makes the water quality to change with the flooding of the river as turbitides and colour tend to be enhanced. Asked if the plant water plant station was inspected before the plant came into operation, Mokoba responded in the affirmative.
“All major projects undertaken by WUC are subjected to Environmental Assessment which basically informs the impact of the projects on the environment,” she said. She explained that, however an analysis of raw water is carried out to inform the design of the plant while the water demand on the other side informs the size of the plant.

Mokoba said that as a result of the plant closure, water shortage is expected in Maun during the maintenance period. She explained that this is because the water  will be supplied drawn from boreholes which only produce five million litres of water per day, down from the 11 million litres of water that is currently supplied to Maun when Borolong Plant is in operation.
“As a mitigation measure, the corporation will ration the water in line with the drawn rationing schedule,” explained Mokoba. Borolong plant is located in Borolong ward near Maun General Clinic and it supplies water to more than 60 percent of the Maun village.

Botswana Federation of Public Parastatal and Private Sector Unions (BOFEPUSU) has accused President Mokgweetsi Masisi of taking them for granted after he snubbed the Federation’s elective congress this past weekend in Gaborone.

Members of the executive committee are of the view that the congress was an opportunity for the president to mend relations with one of the most influential Federations in the country.The congress came immediately after the departure of former President Khama who left office on the 1st April 2018. Khama had intense and fierce running battles with BOFEPUSU to the extent that he refused to meet the Federation leadership.Their sour relationship culminated in the 2011 industrial strike and subsequent amendments of labour laws which unions viewed as anti-workers, and reported Government to International Labour Organisation(ILO), something that tarnished Botswana’s international reputation.

“The bitter relations between Government and BOFEPUSU saw the Federation de-campaigning BDP MPs in 2014 elections which led to most of them losing and the opposition gaining more,” said an insider after news came in indicating that Masisi and his second in command Slumber Tsogwane would not attend the congress. Newly appointed Minister of Investment, Trade and Industry Bogolo Kenewendo graced the event. From the atmosphere at the congress delegates were not happy with this development.
According to the Federation leadership, BOFEPUSU’s congress presented an opportunity for Masisi and his Government, it was expected that the new President would come up with a new approach of engaging with the labour centre.

“His luck came when the Federation invited him to come and address the Congress, and he confirmed attendance. Things took a twist when at the last minute Masisi snubbed BOFEPUSU and instead sent his Deputy Tsogwane. “To make matters worse, the Vice President did not show up at the Congress and instead Government sent the novice Minister Bogolo Kwenwendo,” said a BOFEPUSU executive member. It is believed this has angered the Federation as they felt insulted that the President and Vice President snubbed them and in turn sent a Minister who is wet behind the ears politically when there are seniors and relevant ministers such as Nonofo Molefhi (Presidential Affairs, Governance and Public Administration) and Tshenolo Mabeo (Employment, Productivity and Skills Development). The development is interpreted as contempt against BOFEPUSU and non-consideration of workers’ importance in Masisi’’s work schedule. It is believed Masisi blew his chance and opportunity to appeal to unions, and they now view him from the same prism as Khama, as inaccessible which borders on arrogance.  The lack of access to the country’s top office for unions has been a growing concern to BDP parliamentary hopefuls, as they fear the wrath of unions.

It remains to be seen as to what impact will the latest turn of events have on the build-up to 2019 elections. During May Day celebration this year BOFEPUSU accused Masisi of taking workers for granted when he assigned Permanent Secretary to the President Carter Morupisi to read live on television, the May Day message on his behalf. The Federation fumed saying this undermines workers given that Morupisi is regarded as one of the enemies of the workers. The federation then gave Masisi 100 days to ‘come to his senses’.BOFEPUSU Publicity Secretary Mogomotsi Motshegwe confirmed that they felt belittled by the high office. He said the congress was a good platform for the president to address workers and for the federation to make him appreciate labour issues and matters of national importance.

He said when the new administration indicated that it is willing to work with unions; they thought Masisi would live to his promise. “We thought this was the opportunity for him to share with us his deliverables on labour issues. “We were disappointed when he changed at last minute and decided to send his Vice. We thought because they share the high office together we should be understanding but when he sent a new minister who do not understand some of our issues as workers we felt belittled. “There are other senior ministers who understand our issues better that the president could have sent. But because we are democratic we welcomed her. We are very disappointed because it now shows that the president’s level of priorities is questionable,” Motshegwe said.

Students from tertiary institutions would likely get an allowance increase by end of this month, Minister of Tertiary Education, Research, Science and Technology, Ngaka Ngaka has said. The minister said there are plans to adjust students’ off-campus allowance but would not commit the extent of the adjustment as the matter has not been finalised.

“I will make an announcement before end of this month. The allowance is presently not attracting any inflationary adjustments purely because this is a budgetary matter. We have a limited budget against the ever-increasing numbers of students needing sponsorship,” said Ngaka.The minister told parliament that funds permitting, they could consider ways of linking the frequency of adjustments, as well as the magnitude of the adjustments, to inflationary trends. “I cannot say here that the allowance would be taken back to P1 900.00 or not. This is because we are not only looking at off-campus students’ allowance.

“We are dealing with a broad evaluation and the report would advise us on how to go about everything,” he said. Ngaka indicated that last year his ministry engaged Students Representatives Councils from government and private institutions in Gaborone and Francistown regarding the matter.  He said they did this so that both parties would have a common understanding of the matter and challenges the ministry is faced with. The minister was responding to a question from Member of Parliament for Gaborone North Haskins Nkaigwa who wanted to know if there are plans to upgrade and why the allowance is not attracting inflationary adjustments.

In May this year, Botswana National Union of Students (BONUS) wrote to the ministry demanding the students’ allowances to be increased from P1, 400 to P2, 000. In the letter dated April 10, 2018 addressed to the ministry’s permanent secretary, copied to Minister Ngaka and his deputy Fidelis Molao, BONUS said their demand was influenced by the high cost of living. The students whom at that time wanted to deliver a petition to the minister failed because the minister indicated that he was not informed well on time.

The letter requested government to review the tertiary students’ living allowances in view of escalating rental costs and the general high cost of living. BONUS Treasurer, Tlotlo Madisa said in the letter “the cost of living is high due to increases such as the recent review of the public transport fares, increase in commodities in the past nine years since the allowance was reduced in 2009. Students find it hard to survive”.  In April this year, Alliance for Progressives (AP) Youth League also lobbied student bodies within tertiary institutions to mount pressure on government to increase students’ allowances. Young Progressives President Jacob Kelebeng said as young progressives they believe it is time something is done about the issue. The cost of living is very high and what the students are getting is too little for them to keep up with the changing and challenging world, he said.

“President Mokgweetsi Masisi as the former minister of education, we are sure he is aware of the demand on the call of allowance increment by the students due to the current economic status. About eight years ago student allowance were decreased from P1, 920 to P1, 420 on the notion that the country was going under recession. “Over the years the cost of living has escalated at a higher rate therefore there is a need for increment of allowance to match the cost of living. As the youth league we have since resolved to mobilise the SRCs, students and all members of progressive student movements to demand allowance increment as a matter of urgency,” Kelebeng said at the time.

Court of Appeal is today (Friday) scheduled to hear a case in which Zion Christian Church (ZCC) and its leader Bishop Barnabas Edward Lekganyane are appealing against a High Court decision barring them from holding disciplinary hearing against members.

ZCC and its leader Bishop Barnabas Lekganyane are appealing a decision by Justice Nthomiwa of Lobatse High Court which bars the church from proceeding with a disciplinary hearing against seventeen (17) members of Tlokweng Branch. The 17 disgruntled members of Tlokweng Branch had taken the church to court to interdict it against taking disciplinary hearing against them after they challenged the way things are run in Botswana. Justice Nthomiwa agreed with the church members that they have made a case and interdicted the church and its leader and restrained them from holding any disciplinary hearing against them in terms of the Notice to Attend a Disciplinary hearing dated 20th November 2015, pending the outcome of their case before Justice Mothobi.

The applicants also wanted the court to interdict the Respondents (ZCC and Lekganyane) from holding such a disciplinary hearing pending the church and its leader listening to and addressing the grievances lodged by the Applicants with the church on April 8th 2014 and alternatively, the Respondents’ furnishing the applicants with particulars of the charges they are alleged to have committed.

In a notice of grounds of appeal filed by Bishop Lekganyane and the church seen by Botswana Guardian they want the decision by Justice Nthomiwa set aside. According to the court papers the High Court erred and or misdirected itself by assuming jurisdiction on a matter involving theological/administrative disputes between church members. It is further argued that the lower court erred by holding that the 11 members (respondents in the appeal case) are entitled to an interdict restraining the church from conducting disciplinary hearing pending the outcome of the case before Justice Mothobi.

“The court a quo (court below) erred and/or misdirected itself by holding that the respondents are entitled to an interdict restraining the Appellants from holding disciplinary proceedings against the Respondents pending the Appellants listening and addressing the grievances lodged by the Respondents on the 8th of April 2014,” reads the court papers.

In his judgement Justice Nthomiwa dismissed claims raised by Lekganyane and the ZCC during arguments that the applicants had withdrew their case. “If an agreement was to settle had been reached it could have been confirmed in writing as is customary in this jurisdiction or at least an application could have been made to court for confirmation of the oral settlement agreement.

Of further note is that the Constitution of the ZCC does not exclude the right to have grievances heard. The ZCC as a voluntary organisation is also subject to rules of natural justice and the right to be heard is an important right,” he stated. He also dismissed the point raised by the Respondents that the Applicants were not entitled to request for further particulars of their offence. He said the request for further particulars was a valid request which the church and its leader should have addressed to facilitate preparations for the subsequent hearing by the Applicants.

A group of former students at ABM University in Gaborone are disgruntled that the institution had awarded them a Certificate qualification after being sponsored and admitted to study Diploma in Electrical and Electronics Engineering.

The students reported the matter to the Office of the President last year November following numerous meetings with the school management.  Ernest Moseki of the Appeals Unit at OP confirmed this in an interview with Botswana Guardian. He acknowledged receipt of the letter in February.

This publication has learned that OP was convinced by the Ministry of Tertiary Education, on behalf of the school that the qualification was Diploma and not Certificate as students had stated in their queries three months before the OP’s response. In their letter, which they copied to the Department of Vocational Tertiary Education Training, the students said that they were sponsored and admitted for a Diploma qualification under Target 2000 for 24 months.

“We are doing an external qualification of City and Guilds where diploma is equivalent to City and Guilds Level 2, which is less the level we are sponsored for. Furthermore Department of Tertiary Education funding does not cover the progression from Level 2,” says the letter. They also notified the DVET on the issue. “According to City and Guilds, the programme is a Certificate qualification, whereas our sponsorship and admission letter states that we enrolled for Diploma,” they say in their letter dated September 22, 2017.

The students say they started their First year, semester one in October 2016, doing modules, which are not in City and Guilds programme, viz, Computer Application Appreciation, Self realisation, Economics, Introduction to Business, and Communication studies which ran till December when they sat for an exam. For the second semester, they registered for six modules, being Principles of Electrical and Electronics technology, Working in Engineering, Wiring and Faultfinding, Maintenance, Enterpreneur and Wilding& Fabrication. For the third semester, they registered for six modules.

“All the modules that we complete in Electrical engineering will be six in all, yet the school expects us to do six modules for a period of 24 months. The exams that we sit for are for a Certificate qualification. Our plea is that we should complete the course at a Diploma as stated in our admission and sponsorship letter,” say the students.

BQA’s response-written by Selebo Jobe-on behalf of the Chief Executive was that an evaluation of qualification of the learning programme was undertaken and it was concluded that ABM was offering a Diploma and not Certificate like the students were saying.
The students also engaged Engineers Regulatory Board, which confirmed that the City and Guilds Level 2 is a Certificate level ‘where the holder of the award only is competent as semi-skilled.’  ABM Engineering lecturer Leonard Ndlovu, whose name appears in the management/students meetings could not be interviewed and referred this reporter to Public Relation office.

ABM responds
In an email sent to Botswana Guardian this week, ABM’s Public and Stakeholders Relations officer Lesego Obotseng said that the matter had been in discussion and that the cause of the issue was a communication breakdown between the Franchise (City & Guilds) and the institution. “This matter has since been resolved. I confirm that the students shall graduate with a diploma qualification as already communicated to them on numerous occasions,” she said.

However, students told this publication that they received phone messages from management last Saturday night telling them to come for a meeting at school this Tuesday to resolve the matter. Less than 40 students attended, out of the 234 that study the course. “They admitted to us that they registered wrong qualification and that we should return the certificates to school for them to correct them. And they promised that our certificates will be bearing a Diploma qualification when we graduate in November,” said the students.Tshoganyetso Mangadi, who is the HOD Electrical and Electronics Engineering, and Ndlovu attended the meeting.

The High Court has dismissed with costs a case in which Alpha Direct Insurance Company (Pty) Ltd was challenging decisions by Non-Bank Financial Institutions Regulatory Authority (NBFIRA) instructing the company to pay two of its clients who had submitted claims.

Alpha Direct Insurance Company (Pty) Ltd, a company incorporated in accordance with the laws of Botswana and carrying out business of an insurer as a short-term insurer under the Insurance Industry Act took NBFIRA to court praying for the decisions to be set aside. Tumelo Issacs Motlhala and Arsh Investments (Pty) Ltd had taken Alpha Direct Insurance Company to NBFIRA for refusing to honour their legitimate claims. According to the history of the case on or about April 2015, Alpha Direct and Motlhala entered into a written contract of insurance in terms of which Alpha Direct undertook to insure vehicles Land Rover Discovery with registration number B300 AXR and a Mercedes-Benz C 200K with registration number B 209 APL against the risks described in the contract.
On or about the 2nd of December 2015, Motlhala submitted a claim to the company in respect of a loss allegedly suffered as a result of the theft of the Land Rover. On the 11th of May 2016, after assessing his claim, Alpha Direct repudiated the claim.

The repudiation was on the basis that Motlhala had failed to comply with the provisions of the policy by failing to ensure that reasonable steps were taken to prevent the loss of the insured vehicle. Dissatisfied with the repudiation, Motlhala thereafter raised a complaint with NBFIRA, which subsequently wrote to Alpha Direct requesting reasons for the repudiation and after assessing the complaint and the reasons advanced by the company, then directed Alpha Direct on 19 August 2016, to pay Motlhala’s claim, on the basis that it was not justified to repudiate his claim.

On the other hand Arsh Investments (Pty) Ltd entered in a contract with Alpha Direct on or about 21st May 2015, in terms of which Alpha Direct undertook to insure the buildings located at the Arsh Investment business address against the risks described in the contract. In March 2016, Arsh Investments (Pty) Ltd submitted a claim in respect of a loss allegedly suffered due to damage to the swimming pool at the insured address. After commissioning assessment of the damages to the swimming pool, Alpha Direct repudiated the claim on the basis of an assessment report, indicating that the cause of the loss may have been a landslide and not due to heavy rainfall and based on an assessor’s report that the insured had not been totally truthful in submitting the claim. Arsh Investment then complained to NBFIRA which later directed Alpha Direct to pay the claim. Alpha Direct argued in court that NBFIRA’s power to issue a Directive under Section 53 of the NBFIRA Act does not empower the institution to determine parties’ rights and obligations under a contract of insurance.

It was further submitted that the said Directives were ultra vires and null and void because none of the jurisdictional facts that trigger into operation Section 53(1) of the Act were present and lastly that by issuing the said Directive to pay, NBFIRA purported to determine the rights and obligations between two contracting parties to an insurance contract, as if it were a court or a statutory adjudicating authority.

Dismissing the case on Wednesday this week, High Court Judge Michael Leburu stated that under insurance law, the insurer is enjoined to honour all legitimate claims from the insured. Such insurance law, Justice Leburu said is Financial Services Law. He explained that if the regulator is satisfied that there has been unlawful repudiation of an insurance claim, which will be a violation of a Financial Services Law, then the regulator, in terms of Section 53, has the jurisdictional competence to join the fray and issue a written direction, in order to protect the interests of the clients of the insurance company.

“The trigger or jurisdictional fact would thus be a violation of financial services law (insurance), as envisaged by Section 53(1) (a).  The other jurisdictional factor, as envisaged by Section 53(1) (c) is when the non-bank financial institution conducts its affairs in an improper way.  The other pertinent factor that may trigger the issuance of a Directive is when it is necessary to protect the clients of the non-bank financial institution, in terms of Section 53(1)(f) of the Act,” the Judge pointed out.He explained that the two written Directives, issued within the present context, came about after the Regulator, determined that Alpha Direct was not conducting its affairs in a proper way, through unlawful and unfair repudiation of legitimate insurance claims by clients of an insurance company. Payment and honouring of legitimate insurance claims by an insurance company is an integral part of its affairs, he said.

Justice Leburu indicated that put differently, it is part of the affairs of an insurance company, that it renders to the insured, a sum of money, on the happening of a specified uncertain event, in which the insured has some insurable interest. 
“Insurance companies are enjoined to consider claims fairly and not to unnecessarily repudiate or delay legitimate claims of its customers, and in terms of paragraph 3(b) of the Schedule 2 of the Insurance Industry Regulations, insurance companies are required to do ‘everything to satisfy, as quickly as possible, the legitimate needs of claimants. 

“The legitimate need of claimants is that the lodged valid claims ought to be honoured and not to be repudiated, unlawfully.  NBFIRA is thus entitled to intervene and issue directives, if it considers that such obligation has not been discharged,” said Justice Leburu indicating that Alpha Direct has thus failed to make out a case for judicial review.

Botswana Democratic Party (BDP) factional wars are now fought in any available platform as party members go for each other’s political survival, Botswana Guardian has established.A bitter war between rival Member of Parliament for Tati East Samson Moyo Guma and Minister of Environment, Natural Resources, Conservation and Tourism Tshekedi Khama erupted this week Wednesday when Khama rubbished a report following examination of books of accounts for Botswana Tourism Organisation (BTO) governance by Committee on Statutory Bodies and State Enterprises chaired by Guma.

The committee has in not so many words called on President Masisi to fire Khama as minister. The Committee has recommended that Masisi should take appropriate action in relation to the minister’s meddling in the affairs of BTO; that BTO be instructed to conduct a forensic audit for three-year period ending December 2017, under the direction of the Auditor General and report findings to Parliament.The report further says that Tourism (Amendment) Bill, 2017 seeks to validate a process which was done improperly, and therefore the committee recommends that the Bill be deferred pending the outcome of a detailed forensic; and the minister refrains from acting in such a manner that violates the BTO Act. Khama and Guma belonged to the same faction that supported Masisi in the build-up to Tonota Elective Congress last year where Masisi won the chairmanship of the BDP against Minister Nonofo Molefhi.

It has since emerged that the relationship between the two has soured, something which Khama came short of admitting this week after the Report was tabled in Parliament. The report was tabled by the Committee Acting Chairman Ndaba Gaolathe as Guma had indicated he could not table the Report because he is conflicted.Only Member of Parliament for Gaborone North Haskins Nkaigwa debated the motion calling for the adoption of the Report by Parliament before Khama took over and brushed aside the Report. Khama questioned the report indicating that some of the issues that were raised during the enquiry are not included in the report. “The report was initially supposed to be tabled by committee member Dr. Phenyo Butale MP for Gaborone Central and now I am surprised it is tabled by Gaolathe. The committee chairman has indicated that he is conflicted that is why he cannot table the report. I do not know if he cannot do that because the report has omitted most of the important things or because him the chairman once advised us as the ministry and BTO how we should correct some of the anomalies at BTO,” questioned Khama.

He said Guma has not explained how he is conflicted. He said Parliament has to adjourn so that Guma could clarify. He said Guma had been conflicted by giving them guidance and chairing the proceedings of the enquiry. In an interview outside parliament Khama told this publication that he was not surprised that the committee chaired by Guma would call for his reprimand. “Who is the chair of the committee? I know the committee was not in agreement with some of the recommendations. Only Guma could call for the president to take action against me.

“This is not the first time he is doing this. This is beyond governance it is a political battle. Now we are here at Parliament, where is he ene Guma? He is nowhere to be seen and he knows why he is not here tabling the report himself,” the minister stated. He said Guma could have given them guidance so as to set him a trap. Guma who is out of the country said it would be difficult to comment on what Khama has said.  He indicated that he holds all members of his committee in high esteem. Guma posited that the Report as tabled is a reflection of what transpired during examination.  “The copies of the proceedings and documents are annexed. I take full ownership of that report as the chairman on behalf of the members. I am told Parliament adjourned the debate on account of my absence. I will be available to Parliament to clarify any matter that needs clarity,” said Guma adding that there is no political witch-hunt on Khama.

Asked about being conflicted Guma responded, “please define to me conflict. This never arose during examination. The matter should have been raised during examination if ever there is.” Acting chairman of the Committee Gaolathe told Botswana Guardian that given the limitation of powers of the committee they only recommended according to their findings. He explained that the findings discovered breaches of governance.  He said in terms of the BTO Act for about eight months BTO operated without a Board and the minister was in control. “We do not have specific powers on what must be done. What we are saying is that the president should dig deep within the executive and find out what must be done when such breaches have been committed.  “It could be writing him a warning letter, suspension or firing him from cabinet. It is up to the president now to act looking at rules of governance,” said Gaolathe.
Parliament adjourned without adopting the report.

Presenting the report in Parliament Gaolathe stated that the committee in all its deliberations considers the need for viable state enterprises system. He stated that their report identifies specific actions taken at the BTO that feed “our inferences around breaches in governance, including; un-procedural establishment of the Dubai Satellite Office; unlawful instructions to the BTO to make procurement on behalf of the ministry; unlawful establishment of the Tourism Fund; unlawful restructuring of the BTO; irregular appointment of a Medical Insurance Company by BTO; improper appointment of an Attaché at the Washington, DC Embassy and unlawful termination of the Chief Executive Officer’s Contract of employment.” Gaolathe explained that their forage of information also paints a picture of a minister who has specifically, breached the dictates of the BTO Act in several ways among them failure to appoint a Board within reasonable time and going against procedural advice by Permanent Secretary and CEO.

In 2016 Khama accused Guma and his committee of conniving to hurt his political ambitions. At that time Khama had been summoned to appear for the second time before the committee to answer for his alleged maladministration at the Ministry. This was on the backdrop of developing events at troubled BTO where CEO Brian Dithebe was instructed to cut his stay at the organisation without any reasonable explanation. Dithebe’s work contract was abruptly terminated, allegedly at the instruction of Minister Tshekedi Khama. 

Members of the Rainbow Identity Association (RIA) will soon present a policy brief before Parliament. RIA, registered in 2010, advocates for the rights of intersex and transgender people in Botswana. It has over 100 registered members. In an interview with Botswana Guardian, RIA director Skipper Mogapi said that they were waiting to have a slot, through the Women’s Parliamentary Caucus led by MP Botlogile Tshireletso.

The initial agreement was for RIA to come on June 27 but it was postponed to a date to be announced. The term intersex refers to people born with variations in physical sex characteristics (such as chromosomes, gonads, and genitals) that are considered to be either male or female at the same time, only partially male or partially female, or neither male nor female. While some people with intersex variations also describe their sex or gender identity as non-binary, most are either male or female. The World Health Organisation (WHO) classifies intersex as a disorder, known as disorders of sex development (DSD) that can be treated and cured. This, according to RIA is against international law on human rights. A major concern for intersex people is that the so-called sex normalising procedures are often undertaken during their infancy and childhood, to alter their bodies, particularly the sexual organs, to make them conform to gendered physical norms, including through repeated surgeries, hormonal interventions and other measures.

As a result such children may be subjected to medically unnecessary, often irreversible, interventions that may have lifelong consequences for their physical and mental health, including irreversible termination of all or some of their reproductive and sexual capacity. Medical procedures may sometimes be justified in cases of conditions that pose a health risk or are considered life threatening. Such procedures however are sometimes proposed on the basis of weak evidence, without discussing and considering alternative solutions, says RIA. Challenges faced by intersex persons in Botswana include:

Legal recognition
At birth a birth certificate is issued, as a form of recognition and documentation. This is a general global practice. In Botswana, the national identity card, Omang, educational documents, drivers’ license are among the struggle areas for intersex persons, as they bear only female and male gender binaries. Therefore RIA says it is a site for discrimination and inequality, as intersex persons struggle to have an appropriate gender allocated for them. The Births and Registration Act (BDRA) provides only for female and male binaries, for securing identity documents in Botswana. It is therefore disconnected to the reality of those in the gender margins. RIA feels it needs to be reviewed and amended to include those who do not conform to the normative binaries.

“However, the same Act allows for change of gender descriptor, on the legal document the procedure is only known by those working in the office of Omang and it is a ‘discretionary’ privilege,” states the Policy Brief.
There have been a few cases where intersex persons have managed to change their identity cards, to suit the gender they identity with, albeit without any publicly known processes. This, according to RIA also presents a problematic view and assumption that, change of gender status may be seen as a privilege for some and leaving others out. "An example is Case Y who asked a Kgosi to write a letter to the National Register to change their Omang, while others were sent to Princess Marina hospital for test. The process must be made clear and not disadvantage others, where multiple discrimination already exists,” reads the Policy Brief.

Access to health services
International law classifies surgeries performed on intersex persons, to conform to either male or female as genital mutilation. Access to health and health services is amongst the struggles and challenges that intersex person’s face. The challenges are attributed to the unnecessary surgeries that are performed on intersex children. Reproductive health and enjoyment of sex are greatly compromised. In terms of fertility, the surgeries, may lead to sterility and infertility. Therefore where intersex children are subjected to surgeries, they are denied the right to best attainable health, which is a fundamental human right.
 
Stigma and discrimination
As a result of the biological difference of intersex persons they have been kept secretive and face challenges in their communities, homes and school and professional environments. It could be an issue of physical outlook, use of ablutions and in a school environment, boarding facilities and shared accommodation.

Intersex students suffer in boarding schools as in the case of someone who was in a boarding school and had to wake at 4am, everyday during winter to bath before everyone woke up as he was scared they will recognise that he has long clitoris than other girls. Also he was forced to stay in female dormitory and wear a dress and the discomfort caused the intersex student not to perform well in school.

According to RIA, in prison facilities, an intersex person may be faced with scrutiny and shamed for their difference. Stigma and discrimination is multi-sectional and deprives intersex persons the quality of life that they must be able to enjoy.
Another harmful practice is in initiation schools, which some local tribes are still practising. Intersex persons are subjected to violence during initiation due to the fact that the ritual remains secret and circumcision has robbed many intersex persons of their sexual rights and the right to self- determination and bodily autonomy.

What should be done?
One of the greatest challenges faced by intersex persons in Botswana is legal recognition. Legal recognition has fundamental bearings on one’s identity, social standing, and the quality of life that one can enjoy. While the right to health is not enshrined in the Constitution, the right to life encapsulates the overall rights that human beings are inherently entitled to. Intersex persons must have adequate, quality and effective access to health services. There should be a transparent guide by MoH on how they are dealing with intersex births, says the Policy Brief, adding that it is common cause that some intersex persons are subjected to unnecessary genital surgeries, the consequence of which are fatal: emotionally, physically and mentally and health wise.
More research must be conducted by the MoH in the lived lives of intersex persons in Botswana, says the Brief.

RIA recommends that government should get more specialists and make guidelines public so that intersex persons know how to access services especially in public hospitals. “The only way change can be effected is when there is an open dialogue and understanding of what intersex is. This will also give way for awareness, so that intersex does not remain a hidden and shameful gender and life,” says the brief. The Association also advises that MoH together with the Ministry of Home Affairs must liberate and include intersex persons in granting their rights to identity.

“It is unfortunate and sad that an intersex person may be returned back home by another country’s immigration, because their identity documents do not match their physical outlook. In including intersex status and any mark as maybe appropriate, is to validate the right to identity and a secure environment. Therefore both Ministries must work together to protect the rights of intersex persons,” says the document.Members also state that there should be capacity training for all those who interact with infants. The public health per natal and post-natal programmes must factor in intersex births. The dialogue on intersex must be approached with a human rights based approach and as well that will decrease stigma and discrimination associated with intersex persons.

The Southern African Development Community (SADC) Elections Observer Mission will launch in Zimbabwe on Wednesday 25 July 2018 ahead of the general elections scheduled for July 30th.

The regional economic community is sending a group of election observers to the southern African country’s first-ever elections since the ouster of that country’s long-time ruler, Robert Mugabe. Some 23 presidential candidates are contesting the presidential elections with a tight contest expected between incumbent President Emmerson Mnangagwa of Zimbabwe’s African National Union (ZANU) and opposition candidate Nelson Chamisa of Movement for Democratic Change (T).

A spokesperson of SADC told Botswana Thursday afternoon that a team of observers was already on the ground in Zimbabwe undergoing training on Thursday and Friday before the launch of the SEOM on Wednesday. Thereafter, he said the team of observers would be deployed across the length and breadth of the country to ensure the elections are conducted in compliance  with SADC’s guidelines and norms of democratic elections.

The elections will be held on July 30th after which a report of the observer mission will be released to the Press on the 31st July and to the public on the 1st of August 2018.

Mascom Wireless Botswana who recently lost with costs a case in which it had sought a review of the lawfulness of a directive promulgated by the Botswana Communications Regulatory Authority (BOCRA), is far from giving up, Botswana Guardian can reveal.

Mascom took the matter to Gaborone High court before Justice Michael Leburu complaining about BOCRA’s decision to regulate the Mobile Termination Rates (MTRs) in the country. Their view is that the rates as set by BOCRA are very low and wants them increased. But, BOCRA and telecommunications experts see this differently as they believe Mascom simply wants to protect their interest and profit at the expense of the consumer.

Having dismally failed to convince the court, Mascom has decided to exploit another avenue – appealing to minister of Transport and Communications, Kitso Mokaila in a move that legal experts believe should have been their first step before challenging BOCRA in court.But despite having thought they had a good case, they found Mokaila unshakable as he turned down their request stating that the court has made its decision on the matter.

Minister Mokaila confirmed that Mascom has appealed to him. Speaking to BG News Mokaila said, “Yes, I can confirm that Mascom has contacted and appealed to me by way of a letter from their Chief Executive Officer, Jose Cicero who wrote requesting for my intervention and overturning the ruling.  
“I have since replied them and in my response I told them that the court has pronounced the judgment and there is nothing I can do and the only way out for them will be to appeal to the Court of Appeal,” said Mokaila. It seems Mascom will not give up until they get a favourable response if their Chief Communications and PR Officer, Tebogo Lebotse- Sebego’s response is anything to go by.

Confirming that it is true they appealed to Mokaila, Lebotse-Sebego said that was in line with the Communications Regulatory Authority Act. “We made an appeal to the Honourable Minister Onkokame Kitso Mokaila, seeking his intervention, in what we perceive to be an uneven playing field created by a situation, unheard of in any competitive mobile market, local or international, where the same retail service is regulated for the different competitive providers at different price ceilings,” she said.

According to Lebotse-Sebego Mascom’s plea to the Minister was borne out of a rejection by BOCRA for Mascom to review its retail offering, even though such a review would still retain Mascom’s offer as the lowest tariffs for national calls in the market.
Mascom also accused BOCRA for not properly consulting. But BOCRA demonstrated to the court that before making up its final decision, they conducted a study and consultation for about 14 months as well as making presentation with the operators on a one-on-one basis showing them the information study.

Mascom has the largest subscriber base when compared to other operators - Orange Botswana and BTCL - through its brand beMOBILE.  The BOCRA directive clearly stipulates charges that mobile network operators charge each other for network interconnection.
In 2016 BOCRA study found the rates to be at 29 thebe.

The study determined that 29 thebe was way above costs and directed operators to reduce over a period of two years. The first reduction was on 1st June 2017 reduced from 29 to 22 thebe and the final reduction was on 1st June 2018 to 13thebe per minute.
This is what Mascom did not like. They took the matter to court, but Justice Leburu dismissed the case stating amongst others that the decision by BOCRA is within the context of its decision-making powers and demonstrates that a reasonable and rational choice and decision was made by BOCRA.

Mascom had wanted the court to determine if BOCRA had acted in accordance with its statutory obligations to take regulatory decisions in the open, transparent, accountable, proportionate and objective manner in terms of the Communications Regulatory Authority Act when it issued the regulatory directive No.1 of 2017 on the 24th March 2017 determining the charges that the mobile network operators have to charge each other for network interconnections,.

Mascom Wireless felt that the BOCRA directive - which set Mobile Termination Rules that were to apply on 1st June 2017 and also directed three operators to review their prices to remove the Off Net Mobile voice calls by 1st June 2018 to cost 13thebe - was illegal, irrational, and improper and wanted it reviewed and set aside.

Justice Leburu dismissed the application with costs at attorney to client scale inclusive of costs related to engagement of Senior Counsel. 

Botswana Investment and Trade Centre (BITC) is today (July 23) hosting a Business Forum for a business delegation China led by the China Council for Promotion of International Trade (CCPIT) at Gaborone International Convention Centre (GICC)).

The business forum comes at a time when trade value between Botswana and China is at all time low. According to Li Hongbing, the First Secretary in the Economic and Commercial Counsellor's Office at the Embassy of the Peoples Republic of China in Botswana, the trade value between China and Botswana was US$ 266 million.

Chinese statistics show that in the same period, the outflow of foreign direct investment from China to Botswana dropped 77 percent year-on-year to US$ 18.78 million, while the amount of FDI from China to SADC was US$ 1.07 billion.

These figures belie the expanse of China’s commodity exports to Botswana, which include among others, motor, electrical, audiovisual equipment and its accessories; vehicle parts, clothing and accessories; mechanical equipment and parts; rubber and its products; chemical fiber; steel and products and others.Meanwhile China’s main imports from Botswana were jewellery, precious metals and their products, mineral sand and ash; oil seed kernels, clothing and accessories. Li Hongbing explained Botswana Guardian that China-Botswana economic cooperation was underpinned by a trade agreement signed in 1986.

Sadly the agreement on promotion and protection of investment between the two nations signed in June 2000 has not entered into force owing to “legal issues,” which she did not enunciate. According to BTCL director for corporate communications, Kutlo Moagi, CCPIT, which is led its Chairman, Jiang Zengwei at this business forum, is a duly sanctioned state entity in China vested with both chamber of commerce mandate as well as outbound investment promotion. Li Hongbing told Botswana Guardian that Jiang Zengwei and President of Business Botswana, Gobusamang Keebine would also sign a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) during the business forum.

Moagi wrote in a statement to the press Friday that the focus of CCPIT on Botswana is to establish wide connections and cooperation with relevant international organisations, trade and investment promotion agencies, commercial associations and the local business communities.

It is also committed to enhancing services for companies and making positive contributions to develop bilateral and multilateral trade relationships and the promotion of world economic prosperity. The sectors of focus for the Business Forum include Infrastructure Development, Manufacturing, Financial Services, Energy, Mining, Trading, Agribusiness and Information Communications Technology (ICT).

The business forum, which is officially opened by Assistant Minister of Investment, Trade and Industry, Moiseraele Goya, coincides with Chinese President Xi Jinping’s visit to four African countries this week, during which he will also attend the BRICS summit in South Africa on Wednesday. Li Hongbing cobfirmed that this year’s Forum on China-Africa Cooperation (FOCAC) Summit will take place in Beijing in early September 2018.