Lesotho’s King urged: don't appoint ACJ as Chief Justice

31 January 2020 · Carmel Rickard

While the police continue to search for the current wife of Lesotho’s head of government, Tom Thabane, in connection with the murder of his former wife, Thabane has announced that he is to quit office on a date still to be announced. Thabane, whose ruling All Basotho Convention is riven with splits, is also of interest to the police, who say that Thabane’s personal phone was used at the scene of his second wife’s murder. His current wife disappeared when police said they wanted her for questioning. But while he mulls his departure date, and reflects on where his wife might be, Thabane has not been taking life easy: he has been busy pushing for the Acting Chief Justice to be appointed Chief Justice.

Lesotho’s embattled Prime Minister, Tom Thabane, may well be about to resign his post as he has promised. But while his All Basotho Convention (ABC) party and the people of Lesotho wait for him to indicate the date on which he will stand down, Thabane is far from idle.

His latest efforts, presumably made this week, have been aimed at lobbying for the appointment of the Acting Chief Justice, Maseforo Mahase, as Chief Justice. And it is understood that he has recommended her appointment to King Letsie III.

Splits

Thabane is standing down in the wake of splits in his party, coupled with a police search for his current wife, Maesaih, wanted for questioning in connection with the murder of Thabane’s second wife, Lipolelo. But the Prime Minister himself is continuing to provide material of intense interest to the judiciary and to litigants.

His recommendation of Justice Mahase to the position of Chief Justice has led to a bitter four-page letter addressed to the office of the King, by lawyers acting for Thabane’s son in law, Lebohang Hlaele.

Censured

Hlaele, a member of the ABC, but fired from a senior cabinet position by Thabane, began legal action against Justice Mahase last year. This ligitation was brought to have the judge censured and has not yet been finalised.

Hlaele’s lawyers wrote to the King this week saying that their client, Hlaele, recently discovered that the Prime Mininster had recommended the ACJ for appointment as Chief Justice.

Undermining

They add, ‘The ripple effect of [the appointment of Justice Mahase as Chief Justice] in circumstances where there is a pending case in which her conduct as ACJ is on the radar, is that of undermining the administration of justice.’

‘We are further fortified in the view that the endeavour on the part of the head of government is meant to violate the sacrosanct principle of sub judice and for that reason [we] take strong exception against the approach and reserve client’s right to challenge the prospective appointment in circumstances where there is a pending case seeking to have her disciplined on allegations of judicial misconduct.'

Contempt

‘The act borders [on] constructive contempt of court which your esteemed office should be inclined to avoid.’

The lawyers explain to the King that they have written to his office ‘owing to the peculiar circumstances surrounding the manner in which this litigation has been conducted since its inception.’

Reprehensible

They point out in passing that the four institutions of government (including the office of the King) were all represented by the same legal team, even though the ACJ was ‘sued in her personal capacity’. Hlaele’s lawyers say it is ‘legally reprehensible’ for the ACJ to be represented at taxpayers’ expense in a case where it is clear that she is sued in her personal capacity.

Hlaele’s legal team says the purpose of the letter, however, was to express the reservations of their client about the appointment of Justice Mahase as Chief Justice, and to ‘caution against acts which are calculated to undermine institutional and decisional independence of the judiciary.’

Guise

They point out that Thabane had publicly declared that he is preparing to step down as head of government. Therefore, any measures he might use ‘under the guise of constitutional powers conferred upon his office, in [the] prevailing circumstances is clearly unconstitutional and smacks of an improper motive.’

The lawyers said their client had instructed them to relay ‘a strong message but with genuine moderation and humility’ to the King. The message was that Lesotho was experiencing a ‘very turbulent phase of state governance which demands strict adherence to the values of the rule of law.’

‘The stability of the judiciary is an essential prerequisite of a stable and sound democracy’ and they thus ask the King not to endorse or appoint Justice Mahase.

And, in case the King accedes to Thabane’s recommendation, Halele says he reserves his right to challenge ‘the propriety’ of that appointment.

Predicament

Since being appointed ACJ, Justice Mahase has made something of a name for herself with her support for the cause of striking magistrates – she was once a magistrate – and for her moving addresses to international and African conferences on the predicament of Lesotho’s judiciary, both judges and magistrates. Her theme is the extremely difficult circumstances under which the judiciary must work in this empoverishd country to ensure justice for even the poorest of the poor, and her presentations have won standing ovations.

Lesotho is ranked high in the literacy of its people, but 2016 figures put almost 60 % of the population below the poverty line, while its HIV/AIDS prevalence rate is the second highest in the world.

Package

The present Chief Justice, Nthomeng Majara, has been suspended since September 2018, and it was reported by local media a year ago that a financial package had been agreed between her and the government in exchange for her leaving office. This has not been finalised however.

While the real reason for her suspension has never been established, Justice Majara is one of a growing number of top judges pushed out of the way when elections return a different party to power in Lesotho. The motive for attempting to remove the Chief Justice or the President of the Court of Appeal seems, in a number of cases, to be to allow the appointment of a judge seen as more likely to favour the new ruling party, or at least not overtly linked with the previous government.

Faced with this problem, cynicism about judicial independence is widespread in Lesotho. Along with outside observers, people believe it is under severe threat – perhaps even disappearing – and many simply dismiss judicial decisions on party political issues as evidence of sympathy towards a particular political grouping.

Carmel Rickard

About the author

Recent articles by Carmel Rickard

‘No justification for the unjustifiable’: Lesotho’s ombud slams grand-scale torture, assault in Maseru prison

22 March 2024
Carmel Rickard

Lesotho’s national ombud, Tlotliso Angelina Polaki, has issued a scathing report on massive-scale torture and assaults that took place in Maseru’s central correctional institution during December 2023, leaving about 95% of the inmates of the prison injured, one dead and one who is now wheelchair-bound and will never walk again.

Major court decision on image rights benefits Ugandan soccer players

21 March 2024
Carmel Rickard

Members of Uganda’s national soccer team from the period around 2007/8 have just been awarded a payout against MTN Uganda by the commercial court. The telecom giant had a year-long contract with Proline, the players’ originating development soccer club, allowing it to use the players’ images for advertising. But MTN had continued to use their images even after that contract expired on the basis that it had a sponsorship agreement with Fufa, soccer’s governing body in Uganda. The players then challenged MTN in court, through Proline, and have now won a significant damages award. But the judgment exposed some serious flaws in the way that Fufa has approached the question of using the image rights of its senior players, and the court commented that this is a ‘case study’ for why Fufa needs to sort out its contractual arrangements with senior players.

Executive interference in Ugandan court decisions continues – this time by the justice minister

21 March 2024
Carmel Rickard

Uganda’s minister of justice, Norbert Mao, has taken a leaf straight from the book of the country’s president, Yoweri Museveni. This week, the minister wrote to the principal judge of the Ugandan high court, asking that the judge directly intervene in a matter that has been brought to his attention by an MP on behalf of a constituent. Mao asked for the ‘immediate administrative intervention’ in the matter by the principal judge. Earlier this year, Museveni wrote a similar letter to the chief justice of Uganda, also requesting intervention in a matter, and the CJ later indicated that this was not the first time it had happened.

Is rape by family members treated too lightly by the law?

19 March 2024
Carmel Rickard

The high court has sent the case of a Malawian teenager, charged with raping his 89-year-old grandmother, back to the magistrate’s court for a possible re-trial because the court had wrongly prosecuted a case of rape instead of incest. If convicted in a re-trial, however, Malawi’s incest law could see the accused sentenced to a mere five years. Malawi’s penal code provides for a significant difference between the sentence to be imposed when a man rapes a close family member, and in a case where the two are not related. When they are unrelated, the code provides that a rape offender ‘shall be liable to be punished with death or with imprisonment for life’ (However, Malawi has had what amounts to a moratorium on carrying out the death penalty since 1992.) By contrast, ‘incest by males’, is categorised in the code as a ‘felony’, and anyone convicted ‘shall be liable for imprisonment for five years’. There is an exception: if it is proved ‘that the female person is under the age of 16, the offender shall be liable to imprisonment for life’.

Prominent SA advocates lose battle over conviction in Namibian courts for working without a permit, misleading immigration officials

6 March 2024
Carmel Rickard

Two prominent South African advocates have just lost their last hope of squashing their convictions in the Namibian courts. Johannesburg advocates, Mike Hellens SC and Dawie Joubert SC, had been found guilty on two counts, first, working as legal practitioners without an employment permit, and second, giving false or misleading information to immigration officers when they entered the country in 2019. Though they had gone to Namibia to appear in court in a bail application, they told the immigration officials they were there for a ‘visit’ and for a ‘meeting’. Both appealed against their conviction but they had also asked for a judicial review of the decision. In the high court they lost their appeal but won on the review. The outcome in both matters were taken to the apex supreme court for a final word. In December 2023, they lost their appeal at the supreme court. What would that same court say when the state appealed against the review finding? The supreme court has now given its answer: it found the review, that had favoured Hellens and Joubert, was wrongly decided, and set it aside, awarding costs against the two advocates in both the high court and the supreme court.