Defence slams delays in P200m Ecoplexus trial
Nearly two years after the arrest of a key suspect in Tanzania over his alleged involvement in the P200 million Ecoplexus scandal that rocked Botswana between 2022 and 2023, the high-profile case is yet to reach the Initial Case Management (ICM) stage.
The Prosecution is still failing to disclose all the witness statements it intends to rely on during trial, and the prolonged delays are visibly frustrating the defence, which has accused the Directorate of Public Prosecutions (DPP) of dragging its feet and denying the accused his constitutional right to a trial within a reasonable time.
The latest setback comes despite the prosecution having been told three months ago to put its house in order or risk the matter being dismissed.
When the matter returned before Regional Magistrate Mareledi Dipate this past Tuesday for a status hearing, prosecutors maintained that significant progress had been made since the last appearance.
The State told the court that investigations into the matter had now been completed and assured the court that all outstanding witness statements would be furnished to the defence next week, paving the way for the case to
proceed to the next stage.
However, the prosecution also revealed that investigators had tracked down two additional suspects believed to be linked to the alleged fraud.
According to the State, one suspect has been arrested in Mauritius while another was arrested in Cameroon. The prosecution identified the pair by names that appear to be Chinese, although their nationalities were not disclosed.
Prosecutors said extradition proceedings are now underway to bring the two suspects to Botswana, arguing that the trial should not commence before they are brought before the local courts.
This proposal was fiercely opposed by defence attorney Jeremiah Mishingo, who accused the prosecution of continuously shifting the goalposts while his client remains in legal limbo.
Mishingo argued that the prosecution had already been granted ample time to determine how it intended to proceed with the case and that it was now unreasonable to ask the court to put the matter on hold while waiting for international extradition processes that could take months or even years to conclude.
'We have heard story after story explaining why this case cannot proceed. The games must stop. This is abuse of the highest order disguised as prosecution. Months continue to pass, yet nothing is moving. My client deserves to be tried within a reasonable time,' Mishingo said.
He argued that the continued delays were financially crippling his client, saying the prosecution appeared determined to exhaust him financially before the matter even reaches trial.
'The way this matter is progressing, it seems the intention is to empty my client's pockets so that by the time the trial eventually begins, he is financially exhausted,' he argued.
Mishingo told court that his client, an international businessman, has effectively been prevented from properly running his businesses while the criminal proceedings remain unresolved.
He also challenged the prosecution's insistence that the trial could not proceed without the two newly identified suspects.
'What happens if those extradition applications fail? Those individuals have absolutely nothing to do with the charges my client is currently facing.
He must answer for the allegations levelled against him here in Botswana, irrespective of whether the other suspects are eventually brought before this court,' Mishingo argued.
The defence lawyer reminded the court that his own client's extradition from Tanzania took approximately nine months to complete, despite the process being uncontested because his client willingly returned to Botswana to clear his name.
He argued that there was no guarantee the two fresh extradition requests would be successful, warning that allowing the prosecution to wait indefinitely for foreign jurisdictions would unfairly prejudice his client.
Responding to the defence's submissions, the DPP dismissed suggestions that the accused had been prevented from conducting business.
The prosecution pointed out that Weng remains out on bail and that his bail conditions had already been varied specifically to allow him greater flexibility to travel and continue with his business interests.
The State further assured the court that it remained confident the extradition processes involving Mauritius and Cameroon would not take an unreasonable amount of time.
While acknowledging that the first accused is a foreign national who is entitled to have his matter finalised within a reasonable period, prosecutors argued that the Ecoplexus investigation is exceptionally complex because it involves multiple jurisdictions and requires cooperation from foreign governments.
The DPP submitted that once extradition proceedings are underway in another country, Botswana has very little control over the speed at which those legal processes are concluded.
After hearing submissions from both parties, Regional Magistrate Dipate reserved his ruling for August, when he will determine whether the prosecution should be granted more time to complete the extradition process and move the case forward, or whether the prolonged delays warrant a different course of action.