This is according to various high-ranking insiders within the UDC. The UDC is said to have seriously pondered on the possibility of using a legalistic approach to deal with the BMD fracas but later abandoned the idea. It is reported that there was a general consensus among UDC leaders that using a legalistic approach would have worsened the already hostile relationship among BMD factions instead of bringing them together.
Two weeks ago the UDC leadership delivered its verdict of the mediation process it had undertaken but the verdict was not accepted by Gaolathe’s supporters. The other BMD faction is led by Sydney Pilane. The UDC verdict has also divided public opinion with some saying that it favoured Pilane. Gaolathe and his team immediately announced the formation of a new party, Alliance for Progressives (AP) following the UDC verdict. The UDC verdict had initially recommended that the warring parties should enter into a power sharing arrangement before they could go for a congress re-run. Gaolathe’s team wanted an outright re-run but UDC president Duma Boko said that because of the prevailing circumstances an immediate re-run could not take place.
This week insiders maintained that the UDC leadership felt that had it used a legalistic approach to solve the BMD impasse, Gaolathe and members of his faction would not have prevailed against a team headed by Pilane. They only gripe the UDC reportedly had against Pilane’s team was the environment at Matshekge Hill Senior Secondary School, the original venue for the BMD congress as well as the build up to the congress. Despite their denial, Pilane and members of his faction were accused of fuelling unrest leading to and at the congress in Matshekge.
taken by the BMD NEC (mostly dominated by those who backed Pilane) were taken by a legitimately formed quorum and as such it was difficult for the UDC to disregard such decisions that were somehow often disputed by Gaolathe’s faction.”
According to insiders, the other view by the UDC was that members of Gaolathe’s faction did not challenge their suspensions or legitimacy of their disciplinary hearings. Instead the view of the UDC is that Gaolathe and his team ignored suspensions against them, which meant that had a legal approach been used they could not have stood a chance against Pilane. “The view of the UDC leadership is that they allowed the suspensions, hearings as well as their expulsions to stick. The UDC leadership also felt that Gaolathe’s team was at fault for backing the Ramotswa congress when the NEC, which formed a proper quorum, had said that it should not be held,” said a reputable insider. After the Matshekge congress Gaolathe’s team that held a parallel congress in Bobonong initially threatened to go to court to claim ownership of the BMD but later abandoned the idea. Pilane’s team also challenged their counterparts to proceed with court action. At one point there were insinuations that members of Gaolathe’s team had sought legal advice and they were told that they did not have a leg to stand on against Pilane. At the time, one local political analyst averred that the reluctance by both parties to go court is a veiled admission that they have both flouted party procedures.
Yesterday AP vice president, Wynter Mmolotsi would not be drawn into discussing anything pertaining to the BMD. “We have moved on. We no longer want to discuss issues relating to the BMD,” he said.
UDC spokesperson Moeti Mohwasa was not available for comment. His mobile phone rang unanswered. However Mohwasa recently made it clear that he would not offer any comment on any information pertaining to the UDC that has been leaked to the media.