State case was speculation, exaggeration –Morupisi
Mpho Mokwape | Monday January 29, 2024 11:26
The former Permanent Secretary to the President (PSP) has filed an appeal before the Court of Appeal (CoA) seeking for his conviction to be overturned and given a free lease on life on reasons that the State failed to produce evidence on the charges he was facing but the High Court still made findings and subsequently convicted him.
Morupisi was convicted around October 2022 on two charges of corruption and one count of money laundering related to the Botswana Public Officers Pension Fund (BPOPF) and Capital Management Botswana (CMB) money laundering scandal. He has argued that there was no evidence that supported the charges.
He said the State had charges duplicated and that the court failed to reach a conclusion that the Toyota Land Cruiser, the subject of all three counts, was bought by him and that it cannot be said to be a valuable consideration in terms of the Corruption and Economic Crime Act. “It is critical to state that a court of law should be guided by evidence as opposed to suspicion, conjecture and hyperbole in its determination of issues before it. Suspicions, conjecture and innuendo, no matter how exciting or juicy they can be, should never sway a properly directed court of law to decide a case in line with such suspicions,” said Morupisi.
Grounds of appeal
In the grounds of appeal, Morupisi has argued that the High Court erred by failing to recognise that the charges that he has been convicted of were bad for duplicity and/or that there has been an improper splitting of charges. “The three counts are bad for duplicity, which is prejudicial to me and I am entitled to acquittal.
The court should set aside the charges,” he said. The Toyota Land Cruiser motor vehicle, which he is accused of purchasing with BPOPF funds, in count one and two, is said to have been received by him as a valuable consideration while in count three the same Land Cruiser is said to have been received and converted to him for personal use. According to his court papers, he explained that all the charges speak to one and the same Toyota Land Cruiser, which has been allegedly received by and converted to his personal use by the accused or received as a valuable consideration.
“This is a classic case of duplicity of charges or improper splitting of charges with prejudicial consequences for me because of the duplication of conviction and sentences. This is more so that some counts have very steep and severe sentences,” he pleaded with the court. Morupisi said the charges ought to be quashed for duplicity and that should result in his discharge and acquittal on reasons that the court a quo erred and misdirected itself by failing to reach a conclusion that the Toyota Land cruiser is the subject of all the three counts. He submitted that the conclusion by the court a quo goes sharply against the evidence as led by the prosecution and defence because the evidence shows that the vehicle was bought by him. “The decision of the court is therefore, based on speculation, hyperbole, suspicion, and conjecture.
The court a quo erred and misdirected itself by arriving at key findings, which are not supported by evidence, but speculation, exaggeration, and based on incomplete evidence,' he elaborated. Morupisi argued that the court made a finding that the sale of the vehicle was a loan and therefore, constitute a valuable consideration when there was neither evidence nor basis to support such a finding. He said the vehicle was purchased from Manor Squad Services company from South Africa and that all proof was collected by the State as such the court was wrong and misdirected itself by characterising the sale agreement between Manor Squad Services and the R7 Group company (owned by Morupisi’s wife Pinny) as a sham when there was no evidence to that effect. “The court occasioned failure of justice by failing to consider my side of the story.
There is no finding by the court that my evidence is beyond reasonable doubt, false,” he said. More on grounds of appeal, Morupisi said the court was wrong to conclude that it had been demonstrated by evidence that he did not have money to purchase the Land Cruiser, when the evidence showed that the payment would be by way of instalments. On argument that the State should prove its case, Morupisi submitted that the court in concluding that the three offences have been proved was wrong because on the basis of the evidence of the written sale agreement of the vehicle, proof is that the purchase price has been fully paid by him from his personal funds drawn from his personal bank account held with FNBB and that the source of the funds were legitimate and lawful. “There is only one conclusion that the court ought to arrive at and is that, the vehicle has been lawfully purchased by the R7 Group assisted by me. I submit further that, if the position is that, on the evidence the vehicle in question has been bought legitimately, it follows that such a vehicle cannot be said to be a valuable consideration as stated in counts one and two,” he said.
Morupisi contended that equally, it cannot be said that he and other people received and converted the motor vehicle to their own use as stated by the State and that the court was wrong to conclude that the vehicle was purchased in the form of an interest free loan was not borne by the evidence. “This is so because the evidence points to the vehicle being bought by the R7 Group. All the conclusions reached by the court a quo are not borne by evidence but speculation, suspicion, and incomplete information. It was incumbent of the State to prove that the explanation by me that the vehicle was legitimately bought by the R7 Group and financed by me through my funds is not only false but beyond a reasonable doubt, false,” Morupisi further argued. According to his papers, the evidence that the vehicle in question has been bought legitimately as per his unsworn statement, also comes out very prominently in the evidence of the prosecution and that in his defense, he corroborates what the prosecution has stated and in fact conceded under cross examination. “It is our respectful submission that, because the prosecution has failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the explanation by me is beyond reasonable doubt, false, there exists a reasonable doubt and that should inure me and the court should discharge and acquit me,” he argued.
Facts on charges Morupisi want set aside
Morupisi was charged, tried and convicted on an indictment containing three counts namely, two counts of corruption and one count of money laundering. The first count is corruption contrary to Section 24A (1) of Corruption and Economic Crime Act, Laws of Botswana as read with Section 24 A (3) of Corruption and Economic Crime Act. The particulars of the offence are that Morupisi, whilst employed as Director of Directorate of Public Service Management (DPSM) serving as a Public officer who held the position of Board chairperson for the BPOPF on or about November 11, 2014 without the final resolution of the Board and in abuse of his public office as a chairperson of the BPOPF and whilst the business of the Board was on suspension by a court order, corruptly signed a contract with CMB on behalf of the BPOPF authorising CMB to administer BPOPF funds as private equity managers and in the process obtained a valuable consideration for himself and his wife's company, R7 Group. The second count of corruption is said to be contrary to Section 26 of the Corruption and Economic Crime Act as read with Section 36 of the same Act.
The particulars of the offence are that Morupisi, whilst employed as Permanent Secretary to the President, and as such being a public officer who held the position of Board chairperson of the BPOPF and having signed a contract with the CMB on behalf of the BPOPF, authorising the CMB to administer the BPOPF funds as private equity managers without the final resolution of the Board and whilst the business of the Board was on suspension by court order, on or about May 15, 2017, acting together and in concert with his wife, Pinny Morupisi in her personal capacity and in her capacity as the director of R7 Group, received a valuable consideration, to wit; a gold Toyota Land Cruiser. On the third count, the three accused persons, Morupisi, Pinny Morupisi and R7 Group are charged with the offence of money laundering contrary to Section 47(1) (b) of the Proceeds and Instruments of Crime Act punishable under Section 47(3) of the same Act.
The particulars of the offence are that Morupisi, Pinny and the R7 Group, a company duly registered and incorporated in terms of the Botswana laws, represented herein by Pinny Morupisi as its director, on or about May 15, 2017, acting jointly and in concert, received and converted to their personal use, a Toyota Land Cruiser pickup, bought from South Africa whilst they knew or had reasonable grounds for knowing or suspecting that the said Land Cruiser was derived or bought, in whole or in part, directly or indirectly from the commission of the offence. At the time of the trial, the State had mobilised about 30 witnesses as three were dropped along the way with a view to prove its case against the accused persons and at the close of the defence case and following the submissions by both parties, the court a quo convicted him of all the three counts and while his wife Pinny and her R7 Group were discharged and acquitted.
The former PSP was sentenced on count one to two years imprisonment wholly suspended for three years on condition that he does not commit an offence of this nature. Morupisi was ordered on count two, to pay the sum of P50,000, in default five years imprisonment while on count three, to pay the sum of P80, 000, in default eight years imprisonment. The fines in respect of count two and three were to be paid within 90 days from the date of sentence, being November 30, 2022. The Land Cruiser was also forfeited to the State. The case is scheduled for hearing on February 1 and Busang Manewe attorneys represents Morupisi. Appearing for State is attorney Kentse Molome.