Three dismissed Botswana Housing Corporation (BHC) executives have launched an urgent High Court application alleging that a campaign backed by Minister of Water and Human Settlement Onneetse Ramogapi enabled the unlawful concentration of power at the state-owned housing agency after the dissolution of the board.
In court papers filed in the Maun High Court, former chief corporate counsel Pogiso Thapelo, director of risk and compliance Richard Chilisa, and head of information technology Samantha Chabata argue that their removal was part of a wider effort to weaken governance controls and remove opposition to controversial procurement decisions.
At the centre of the dispute is Acting General Manager Professor Selinah Busang, whom the applicants accuse of acting without legal authority after the dissolution of the BHC board.
The applicants contend that Busang’s rise within the corporation was closely linked to the minister’s support.
In a founding affidavit, Thapelo alleges that before Busang’s appointment as chief operations officer, “the Minister had previously requested that she be appointed as Acting General Manager and the Board rejected this”.
He further claims that after joining BHC, “she made it clear that she was there to look after the line Minister’s interests”. According to the affidavit, Busang then “began issuing threats of dismissal to her colleagues and directing profanities at her colleagues”. The court papers state that grievances were subsequently lodged against her by employees, including regional director south Pinky Gobuamang and her personal assistant. The affidavit alleges that tensions escalated after the BHC board attempted to institute disciplinary action against Busang.
“As acts of misconduct very quickly caught the attention of the Second Respondent’s board of directors, she was called upon on 16 March 2026, through a letter, to show cause why disciplinary action should not be taken against her,” Thapelo states.
But according to the application, the process was halted after ministerial intervention.
The court papers allege that at the Kgale Bonno Housing Scheme, Busang engaged contractors to undertake site-clearing and geotechnical survey work costing more than P1.4 million “without any quotations, letters of appointment or written agreement entered into in advance of the workings being carried”.
“The issuance of the show cause letter resulted in the Minister, together with his Assistant Minister, the Acting Permanent Secretary and the Deputy Permanent Secretary attending a Board meeting that was scheduled on 17 March 2026 at which the Minister directed the Board not to take any disciplinary action against her,” the affidavit reads.
The applicants claim the dispute widened beyond workplace relations and into procurement matters involving major housing developments.
The court papers allege that at the Kgale Bonno Housing Scheme, Busang engaged contractors to undertake site-clearing and geotechnical survey work costing more than P1.4 million “without any quotations, letters of appointment or written agreement entered into in advance of the workings being carried”.
The affidavit further alleges that Busang sought to advance the appointment of contractors for bulk infrastructure works “without there ever been an invitation to tender” and without establishing whether the proposed prices reflected market value.
As members of BHC’s investment committee, the three executives say they raised concerns about the commercial risks associated with the proposals.
“Our report highlighted the commercial risks of the transaction that was being motivated by the First Respondent,” Thapelo states.
The applicants argue that their opposition to the procurement proposals ultimately led to their removal.
“It is now become clear that the real reason for the First Respondent’s purported decision to terminate our contracts of employment is to make it easier for her to completely override procurement processes and to weaken the governance structure of the Second Respondent,” the affidavit states.
“It appears to be part of her plan to dismantle proper governance processes and administer it as if it her personal company.”
The application also challenges the legality of the dismissals themselves.
The executives argue that the BHC board — which they say alone possesses the authority to appoint and dismiss senior executives — had already been dissolved when Busang issued letters terminating their contracts on 19 June.
According to correspondence attached to the court papers, the minister dissolved the board with effect from 4 June.
“In the absence of a Board at the time of the impugned decision, there was no lawful decision-maker capable of exercising dismissal powers,” the applicants argue.
“Any purported exercise of such power is therefore ultra vires, unlawful, and of no force or effect.”
The court challenge paints a picture of an institution facing a governance crisis. The applicants warn that the combination of the dissolved board, the departure of senior executives and their own removal has created conditions for abuse of power.
“The absence of oversight is now being exacerbated by the immediate removal of three members of senior management,” the affidavit states.
“This has created a vacuum for the First Respondent (Busang) to exploit and override procurement processes to the detriment of the Second Respondent (BHC).”
The three executives are seeking an order suspending their dismissals, restoring them to their positions pending a judicial review and declaring the termination decisions unlawful.
The matter was filed under a certificate of urgency on Wednesday June 24, 2026 and is before Justice Professor Bugalo Maripe.
