Gaborone — The Botswana Congress Party (BCP) has called for urgent action to stop what it describes as a costly and opaque school‑building programme, warning that the deal could saddle the nation with unsustainable debt.

BCP Secretary for Publicity and Information, Olebile Machete, said the party will demand full disclosure of all agreements between government and the Africa Hero Foundation, the entity linked to South African businessman Zunaid Moti.

The BCP insisted in a press statement that the Vice President and Minister of Finance Ndaba Gaolathe must immediately table contracts, guarantees, and payment schedules relating to the deal before Parliament.

The party has also proposed a parliamentary inquiry through the Public Accounts Committee to establish how a project previously rejected by the Ministry of Finance was revived.

To underline its seriousness, the BCP has pledged to cover the costs of convening a special session if Parliament cites budgetary constraints. From 14 to 18 September 2026, the party will meet civil society and labour groups to map a national response.

At issue is a plan to construct 100 prefabricated schools under a Public‑Private Partnership (PPP) arrangement. The BCP argues the project, valued at P3.6 billion, has been inflated to P20 billion over 20 years, with taxpayers expected to pay nearly P200 million per school — a 555 per cent mark‑up.

The protagonists are President Duma Boko, who chairs the Africa Hero Foundation, and Zunaid Moti, whose company is spearheading the initiative.

The Foundation has already launched projects in Gaborone’s Block 7 and received interest from Malawi for 450 schools. However, questions remain about funding sources, cost transparency, and the absence of listed directors for the company.

The BCP contends that Botswana could raise the required funds domestically through pension funds, insurers, or municipal bonds, keeping accountability within the country. Instead, it warns, the current arrangement risks binding the nation to long‑term payments that benefit private interests.

Meanwhile in Malawi ………………

Transparency, Accountability Risks in the African Hero Foundation Proposal for Malawi

The announcement that Malawi will receive 450 new facilities, 100 clinics, 300 schools, and 50 vocational training centres from the African Hero Foundation has been presented as a moment of national opportunity.

The press statement issued following a ceremony in Gaborone, Botswana, emphasises Malawi’s “stability and confidence in Mutharika’s leadership,” and cites commitments by the Jindal Power Group and the Moti Group to fully fund modern, environmentally friendly structures.

Yet beneath the optimism lies a complex web of governance, financial integrity, and accountability concerns that demand rigorous scrutiny before Malawi accepts such an expansive and politically sensitive infrastructure package. Otherwise, this is another “Bringing Foundation”: scam.

At the centre of the initiative is the African Hero Foundation, chaired by Botswana’s President Advocate Duma Gideon Boko and co-founded by South African businessman Zunaid Moti.

The Foundation’s model, rapid deployment of clinics and schools using repurposed containers, has been showcased in Botswana and Zimbabwe. However, the Foundation’s public profile reveals no audited financial statements, no published governance framework, no regulatory filings, and no transparent disclosure of its operational or financial architecture.

This opacity is not a trivial administrative gap; it is a structural risk. Any organisation proposing to build 450 public facilities in Malawi must demonstrate institutional maturity, financial integrity, and accountability mechanisms. African Hero has not yet done so.

The Foundation’s leadership compounds these concerns. Duma Boko is a Politically Exposed Person (PEP), having served as Botswana’s opposition leader. PEP involvement is not inherently problematic, but it triggers heightened AML/CFT risk under FATF standards. The Foundation’s co-founder, Zunaid Moti, is a figure whose business history is marked by adverse media, allegations of illicit financial flows, and politically entangled operations in Zimbabwe.

Investigative reporting has documented how entities linked to the Moti Group allegedly participated in large cross-border money-moving networks, with funds channelled through opaque loan structures. These allegations do not constitute guilt, but they do constitute risk, and risk of a magnitude that cannot be ignored when public infrastructure is at stake.

The funding partners named in the press statement, Jindal Power Group and the Moti Group, introduce further layers of complexity. Jindal Power Group is a major Indian energy conglomerate with strong financial ratings, yet related entities have faced regulatory investigations for potential violations of India’s foreign exchange laws, including alleged round-tripping of funds. The Moti Group, meanwhile, carries the highest risk profile of the three entities due to its adverse media exposure, complex ownership structures, and operations in high-risk jurisdictions.

When two private conglomerates with opaque financial histories commit to funding hundreds of public facilities in Malawi, the absence of transparent financing plans, escrow arrangements, or independent audits becomes a critical governance red flag.

The lack of transparency in the African Hero proposal manifests in several ways:

•      No disclosure of project financing mechanisms: The press statement merely states that the Jindal Power Group and Moti Group “will fully fund” the structures. There is no explanation of whether funds will be grants, loans, equity investments, or blended finance.

•      No clarity on ownership and control of the facilities: Will the clinics and schools be owned by the Government of Malawi, African Hero, or a private SPV?

•      No procurement or contracting framework: There is no indication of how contractors will be selected, how quality will be assured, or how cost inflation will be prevented.

•      No accountability safeguards: There is no mention of performance bonds, warranties, or step-in rights for the Government of Malawi.

•      No transparency on beneficial ownership: Malawi’s Beneficial Ownership Regulations require disclosure of ultimate owners of entities operating in the country. None has been provided.

These gaps create fertile ground for misallocation, political capture, or misuse of funds, even if the project is nominally philanthropic. Malawi’s history with opaque infrastructure deals, whether in energy, education, or procurement, demonstrates that lack of transparency is not an abstract concern; it is a proven pathway to loss, litigation, and reputational damage.

The lack of accountability is equally concerning. The African Hero Foundation is not a multilateral agency, not a registered development partner, and not subject to the fiduciary oversight mechanisms that govern traditional donors. Without audited accounts, governance disclosures, or compliance frameworks, Malawi risks entering into a relationship where no party can be held accountable for delays, defects, cost overruns, or failures in delivery. The scale of the project, 450 facilities, magnifies this risk exponentially.

Furthermore, the political framing of the announcement, emphasising Malawi’s “stability” and “confidence in Mutharika’s leadership”, raises the possibility that the project may be used to advance political narratives rather than development outcomes. Infrastructure delivered through opaque private foundations can easily become entangled in electoral politics, undermining public trust and exposing the state to accusations of favouritism or foreign influence.

In light of these concerns, Malawi must adopt a strict due diligence posture. This includes verifying legal registration and beneficial ownership of all entities; demanding audited financial statements; conducting PEP and sanctions screening; requiring independent engineering assessments; and insisting on Malawi-based SPVs with ring-fenced funds. Without these safeguards, the project’s scale becomes a liability rather than an opportunity.

The promise of 450 new facilities is undeniably attractive. Malawi needs clinics, schools, and vocational centres. But development is not merely about building structures; it is about building them responsibly, transparently, and accountably. Until African Hero Foundation, the Moti Group, and Jindal Power Group demonstrate full transparency and submit to rigorous accountability mechanisms, Malawi must proceed with caution. In development, as in governance, opacity is risk, and risk without accountability is danger.