A few days after a case challenging the reinstatement of the 11th Amendment to the Constitution Bill of 2022 by the 11th Parliament was disposed of, the same Parliament was slapped with another litigation from some Members of Parliament (MPs).
The Leader of the All Basotho Convention (ABC), Mr. Nkaku Kabi together with the Leader of the Basotho Patriotic Party (BPP), Mr. Tefo Mapesela have filed an urgent application before the High Court sitting as a Constitutional Court, seeking its intervention regarding certain issues of the Parliament.
The applicants are in the application asking the court to interdict the Speaker of the National Assembly who has been cited as the first respondent in the matter, from proceeding with the implementation of the decision to convene the Special Meeting for the agenda articulated in the letter of the Leader of the House dated August 04, 2023 pending finalisation of the case.
They request that it be declared that the office of the Speaker of the National Assembly has the constitutional power to convene Parliament subject to crucial factors that are appropriately seasoned with consideration sub judice. They further ask that the request of the Deputy Prime Minister for a Special Meeting of the National Assembly (Recall of Parliament during Adjournment) dated August 04 2023 addressed to the Speaker be declared unlawful.
The applicants, among others, ask that it be declared that the Speaker of the National Assembly has no constitutional power to suspend the Standing Order when there is no emergency and or for the reasons, he articulated to Parliament on the 14th August 2023. They further ask that the decision of the Speaker of the National Assembly to convene a special meeting of Parliament when the case of Yean For Economic Sustainability (YES) and others were pending to be declared unlawful to the extent that it breaches the sacrosanct principle of the separation of powers.
They ask the court to direct the Speaker of the National Assembly to dispatch the dossier of the proceedings and or information that informed the decision to convene a special meeting within seven days after service of the order.
The applicants have in the court papers indicated that the Speaker of the National Assembly has taken a number of decisions which would be constitutionally impermissible for him to make in the circumstances of this case. They stated that there is no rational and justifiable basis for convening the Special Meeting of Parliament when there is a case pending before the Court for which the debates in Parliament had been halted to allow the judiciary an opportunity to address the issue.
They pointed out that the factual matrix providing the context in which the Deputy Prime Minister exercised the powers to influence the Speaker of the National Assembly to suspend the Standing Orders exposed Parliament to illegitimate hardships. They added that the Speaker failed to balance the commitment he made to uphold the Constitution and fell into the trap of serving the interests of his party to the detriment of the independence and impartiality of the position he occupies.
The applicants emphasised that if allowed to go at this rate, the Speaker of the National Assembly is likely to find himself making decisions which have got no contextual and factual foundation, yet with far reaching consequences on the democracy of Lesotho.
The respondents in the matter include the Clerk of the National Assembly and the Attorney General.
Source: LENA 29/08/2023
