However, the High Court found that SITA had failed to explain its reasons for the lengthy delay and further failed to make out any case for the extension of the 180-day period. Such a review should have been brought within 180 days of the impugned decision, rendering SITA’s review application many months late. The High Court concluded that SITA had to challenge its decision to conclude the agreement by way of judicial review in terms of PAJA. The issue could not be determined at arbitration and SITA approached the High Court to review and set aside the agreement under the principle of legality. When a payment dispute arose in 2013, SITA argued that the agreement with Gijima was invalid for want of compliance with the constitutional prescripts regarding public procurement, in particular, s217 of the Constitution.

SITA, however, assured Gijima that proper procedures had been followed and went so far as to provide an unconditional warranty in this regard. Throughout the contract and negotiation period Gijima was concerned that the necessary procurement processes had not been complied with.

The agreement was subject to various extensions and revisions. The facts were these: In September 2006 the State Information Technology Agency (SITA), the government’s information technology procurement agency, concluded an agreement in terms of which Gijima, a private company, would provide information technology services to the South African Police Service. This article argues that, to enhance amicus participation in litigation, thereby enhancing the epistemological quality of its public law jurisprudence, Botswana must pay close attention to the practices and experiences of South Africa where amicus participation has resulted in the phenomenal growth of constitutional jurisprudence.The Constitutional Court recently delivered clarity in a landmark judgment: State Information Technology Agency SOC Limited v Gijima Holdings (Pty) Ltd ZACC 40. This is largely due to inflexible rules of standing and the general lack of knowledge of the potential usefulness of the institution by the judiciary.

In Botswana, amicus curiae participation is still at a nascent stage. They have done this through the submission of briefs that seek to broaden perspectives of cases and by advancing innovative legal and factual viewpoints, thus assisting the courts in reaching appropriate conclusions. Their appearance has thus contributed to the promotion and protection of human rights before municipal courts and international tribunals. It has become a standard feature of litigation for amici to appear before courts, acting as the vindicator of rights for the politically powerless and marginalized.

Gijima hig court zacc