Judgment in the case between Balete and Government over the ownership of Kgale farms has been reserved for May 21st, 2021.
In a brief court appearance last week before a three-man bench panel, Justices Michael Mothobi, Mokwadi Gabanagae, and Gabriel Komboni-the parties through a consent order agreed to have filed supplementary heads of argument by the 23rd March and a reply to the supplementary heads today (March 30th).
Facts of the case are that Government, through the Malete Landboard, dragged the tribe of Balete through Gamalete Development trust, Kgosi Mosadi Seboko, the Registrar of Deeds for Botswana and the Attorney General over title deeds rights of the 2000-hectare Kgale farms otherwise the remaining extent of the Farm Forest Hill 9-KO.
The government argues that the land belongs to the landboard under the tribal territories act which places the administration of the farm to the Malete Landboard.
In their defence, Balete maintain right over the land arguing that they bought the piece of land back in 1925 for investment purposes. They argue that their tribe contributed to raising the 3,000 Sterling Pounds required to purchase the land from Aaron Siew. To this day, the title deed is in the name of Kgosikgolo for and on behalf of the tribe.
Meanwhile, in a press statement released last week, the Malete Landboard has responded to allegations following a press briefing held on Sunday by the Deputy Chief Kgosi Tsimane Mokgosi.
However, the landboard noted that they will go into the facts of the case as the matter is before court but rather responded to the allegation by Kgosi Mokgosi. “On a rather disappointing note, the Deputy Chief Kgosi Tsimane Mokgosi addressed a press conference to air his opinions about the case and made several allegations against the landboard which allegations are not correct.”
The statement further reads; “he alleged members of the board did not sanction the proceedings out of free will rather they were under oppression or dictates of the landboard secretaries. The said allegations do not only undermine the intelligence of members of the board but also suggest members of the board do not appreciate their rights, duties and obligations, one of which is that they should maintain their independence at all times,” further reads the statement.
The case continues