Khama in crosshairs of BCL inquiry

 A Presidential Commission of Inquiry has been established to find the reasons why the BCL mine was closed in October 2016 by former President Ian Khama and other related matters. The official reason proffered by the Khama administration back then was largely that government had reached a conclusion that the mine was no longer economically viable to operate and that copper and nickel prices had significantly dropped. The mine closure has since then become a topical issue highly criticised by opposition parties at every given opportunity particularly in parliament. The current Speaker of the National Assembly Rre Dithapelo Keorapetse who was the then Member of Parliament of Selebi-Phikwe West constituency, became the notable voice on the issue where he, at some point, called for the establishment of an inquiry on the mine closure. He must be delighted in his private corner that such has been established. 

As the mine closure became a topical issue in the political cycles and elsewhere, it did so from Business Botswana under which a Task Team was established to, according to the government-owned Daily News newspaper dated 21 March 2017, ‘investigate circumstances surrounding BCL closure.’ Seemingly in agreement with the reasons proffered by government to close the mine, the newspaper continued that ‘Presenting the Task Team report, Business Botswana Chief Executive Officer Dr Racious Moatshe said government decision to place BCL, Tati Nickel Mining Company and related entities under provincial liquidation in October 2016 was ostensibly made to minimise losses to the shareholder as the mine was fast spiralling towards a state of bankruptcy.’ However, the Task Team major recommendation was that ‘… the mine should not be completely shut down as it still had the potential to be mined profitably with some restructuring and change of ownership.’ 

The point of departure should be that the mine closure by Khama was reckless in that there was on the face of it, no extensive consultation prior to the closure, with one of the key stakeholders being the Botswana Mine Workers Union whose members I will argue, formed the bulk of the labour force at the mine. It is estimated that about 5000 mine workers lost their jobs and by extension livelihoods to many of their immediate and extended families. The socio-economic devastation to other businesses, large and small, cannot be understated wherein the effects are still felt to this day. It is in this respect that Khama is in the crosshairs of the Presidential Commission of Inquiry into the closure of BCL mine owing principally to the decision he took to do so. It is highly likely the Inquiry will make this finding which fortunately, we already know. The question arising should be what recommendation it will make in this regard in so far as holding him legally liable for mine closure and the subsequent after effects should it be permissible in law. 

When announcing the establishment of the Inquiry, President Advocate Boko said one of the terms of the Inquiry will be to ‘… inquire into whether any of the previous Presidents has however influenced anyone in the public sector in relation to winding up of the BCL Group of Companies, liquidation processes related to the BCL companies and or the affairs of the BCL.’ It would appear from this statement that he probably knows more to the mine closure than would have been publicly made by the Khama administration. 

Khama is likely to defend himself by stating he took the decision upon receiving recommendations to close the mine from those he had tasked to look into the matter. He will have to present documentary and any other evidence to that effect for verification. He is also likely to refer to Section 47 of the Constitution which empowers the President of the Republic to take a discretionary decision on any matter without consulting anyone if he so desires. This is the same law that President Boko used to identify and appoint Alvarez & Marsal Holdings to perform the forensic audit on government and its State-Owned Enterprises. From my layman’s point of view, I am not sure whether or not an executive decision taken by the President of the Republic in view of the provisions of Section 47 can legally be considered challengeable. It is common cause that Khama will not deny that he took the decision to close the mine and that he in fact sent his then Vice President Mokgweetsi Masisi to deliver the devastating news to the BCL employees. I am therefore struggling to ascertain what the purpose and end result of determining who ordered the mine closure and the reasons thereof when such information has been in the public domain from day one and crucially that such has not been disputed. 

Digressing a bit, let me make this point. A trend is being created by the President that Botswana institutions like the Directorate on Corruption and Economic Crime (DCEC) and the Financial Intelligence Agency (FIA) are unable to investigate high value corruption and illicit financial transactions by outsourcing these functions to external entities as it currently obtains in the current investigations. And the reason is that the President is trying to avoid ‘home made investigations, findings and decisions.’ We may very well be descending into a situation where the judiciary is also outsourced for the same reasons. Even if these institutions were perceived rightly or wrongly that political pressure and influence were exerted on them by the previous BDP administrations, is the argument that there are no men and women of integrity who can investigate the BCL matter and the wrongdoing in government by home-grown investigators? Should the President be viewed as someone who despises home-grown investigators in order to bring in his external friends? Your guess is as good as mine. 

Former President Khama will undoubtedly be the main focus of the BCL inquiry given that he is the one who closed the mine and in the process, caused untold suffering and harm to Selebi-Phikwe and its neighbourhood. While this is so, and accompanied by the fact that the decision was manifestly irrational if it can be established the closure was not backed by any empirical evidence, I don’t believe his blameworthiness can go beyond the point that it was an irrational decision. His blameworthiness if anything, could be established if he corruptly influenced the liquidation process in one way or the other in order to gain financial benefit for himself or others close to him. I am prepared to be persuaded otherwise as always. Judge for Yourself! 

*On a sad note, condolences to the family, friends and colleagues of the late former Mmegi reporter Rre Lebogang Mosikare. God Bless. adamphetlhe08@gmail.com