29 May 2024

 A case in which Masitaoka chairperson Godfrey Ratlhaga was seeking the High Court to set aside the tribunal decision and have Nicholas Zakhem removed as the Botswana Football League (BFL) was dismissed with ordinary costs. 

The case was before Justice Itumeleng Segopolo of the Gaborone High Court on Tuesday, who made it clear that the applicant should send the issue to the tribunal. 

Ratlhaga had approached the High Court to set aside the resolution of the BPL board to appoint Zakhem as BFL chaiperson. 

On December 16, 2023, the BFL passed a resolution determining that Ratlhaga be removed from the position of chairperson and that, amongst other things, Zakhem be appointed in his place as chairperson. Ratlhaga approached the High Court on urgency shortly after the decision was reached for an interdict to stay the implementation of the said resolution and gave the applicant a period of 21 court days to file an application to set aside the resolution, which formed the subject matter of the dispute.  

According to the court papers, the case was before Judge Chris Gabanagae on December 29, 2023 who ruled in favour of Zakhem and stayed the implementation of the resolution complained of. 

Within the said 21 court days, an application was made by Zakhem to the BFA tribunal, which determined that the resolution was in fact a nullity and consequently set aside. 

However Justice Segopolo said attorney Jones Moitshepi, who was representing Ratlhaga, could not convince the court about the harm or serious irreparable harm that would be caused to his client if the court did not ‘jump’ and give his client the relief that they sought in urgency. 

“First of all, you are saying I must declare the arbitration decision null and void, or alternative to that the court should review and set aside the proceedings. I think you are just asking the same thing here,” he said. 

Moitshepi said if the matter was not heard on urgency, it would mean both Zakhem and Jagdish Shah would still be in the office, therefore they should be restrained from occupying the office. 

Justice Segopolo then questioned if they wanted the office to be paralysed, adding that what the attorney was simply saying was that if the court did not intervene, Ratlhaga would have been robbed a month of holding office given that BFL elections were expected in June. 

The court dismissed the matter on the basis that the applicant did not satisfy Order 12 (12) of the rules of the High Court in that the applicant has failed to explicitly set forth the circumstances that render the matter urgent and to also indicate why the substantial redress cannot be afforded at a hearing in due course. 

The judge said Ratlhaga did not take any steps to exhaust local remedies, adding that he also failed to establish any urgency by failing to show what irreparable harm he would suffer if the matter would be heard in the ordinary course. The first respondent was the Botswana Football Association, which was represented by Joseph Akoonyatse, second respondent was Keneilwe Mere, third was Obonye Jonas and fourth was William Maboane who were both not represented. 

Fifth respondent was Nicolas Zakhem, who was represented by Simwe Mwiya while the sixth respondent was Botswana Football League represented by Charles McErick. 

Tumelo Toteng and Jagdish Shah were seventh and eighth and and were not represented. Ends