Mokotsolane Rapelang Mosae
Opaque appointments in Lesotho have long been a rule rather than an exception since democratic rule. These opaque appointments have often been termed political because often times we are placed at pains to make sense of the appointments. For purposes of this commentary, therefore, I too will use the term political appointments which will simply mean appointments made by a political functionary without following due process or at least without being transparent about the procedure followed.
Governance scholars in this country have stated before that the judiciary, civil service and security agencies have been politicised through political appointments, which have resulted in institutions being used for political ends, which has in turn led to constant instability in the country.
The term “reforms” in Lesotho is also quickly losing its spark, what used to be a beacon of hope is now becoming just another political slogan. Since 2012 Lesotho has been pursuing reforms against the backdrop of instability. The cause of the instability? Wide politicisation of all sectors of government which effectively led to the collapse of governance. After the main political parties failed to restore any order to the mountain kingdom, the newcomers under the banner of the RFP seemed like what Basotho truly needed. These newcomers coined something that echoed with the sentiments of Basotho; “meritocracy”.
For a country with such high rates of unemployment, where the youth constantly graduate only to walk up and down the streets with brown envelopes applying for jobs they will never attain because they do not have the requisite “connections”. For a country where it has become an open secret which political parties military leaders support, and for a country where the judiciary was so political that one did not have to have a semblance of knowledge on the reading of the law to know which political party would emerge victorious when appearing before certain judges. Meritocracy truly was what Basotho wanted to hear.
The RFP, in its manifesto, stated categorically that unlike governments that came before it, they would do away with the phenomenon of political appointments, where people come out of nowhere to occupy integral positions. Under the RFP government, transparency would be the order of the day. To bolster this point, the RFP even said they would lead by example, and exercise meritocracy in the appointment of candidates to stand for elections within its own ranks.
On June 27, 2022, the RFP issued circular 0018/2022 which announced that primary elections would be held in 69 constituencies, further that after the primary elections, the names of the top 4 performers would be sent to the RFP headquarters for purposes of holding interviews.
The circular stated that those successful in the interviews would be the ones to stand for elections under the banner of RFP. The result of this was that after the interviews, candidates who were victorious in primaries in 30 of the 69 constituencies were substituted by other candidates. With these results, the RFP submitted its candidates list of the IEC as per requirement.
The first thing that was curious about the conduct of RFP was that it had imposed candidates in 11 constituencies on RFP members and categorically decreed that those candidates would not go through the process that was meant to ensure meritocracy. This, for some spectators, was the first alarm, as the stance was uncomfortably reflective of George Orwell’s satirical comment in “Animal Farm” that all animals are equal but some are more equal than others.
The Court was quick to stop the RFP dead in its tracks and in Moloi Ralentsoe & 4 Ors v Motjoka Toloane & 7 Ors CIV/APN/0257/2022LSHC the court found that the RFP in substituting the primary election winners, acted unconstitutionally as it denied the winners the right to participate in public affairs.
The RFP had no choice but to adhere to the court ruling and reinstate the erstwhile substituted candidates. However, despite being shown the error of their ways, the RFP opted to reinstate only those candidates who had brought the case to court and not all those who were affected by the decision, necessitating yet another challenge which they again lost. This attitude by the RFP was yet another red flag, as it exposed the extent to which RFP was willing to go to impose certain chosen individuals in prospective positions of power. It further gave a sneak peak into the RFP’s interpretation of meritocracy; perhaps in the RFP dictionary, it means “the ones chosen by the inner circle”.
One would have hoped that this early rebuke by the courts would force the RFP to go back to the drawing board and actually attempt to give meritocracy a fighting chance, but if the actions of the government are anything to go by, Basotho who once believed in that campaign promise are yet to face a rude awakening.
Anyway, what is meritocracy? In simple terms, meritocracy means the holding of power by people who have been selected according to their high quality. It is therefore not fallacious to claim that for there to be a meritocracy, there has to have been an assessment of the quality. In appointments, therefore, the expectation was that a clear process would be set out on how strategic positions would be filled in government institutions and parastatals, but lo and behold, in true RFP fashion, candidates are being imposed on institutions without any clear process being followed.
Most recently, Basotho were shocked when the government appointed an in-service soldier by the names of Mantšo Sello to head up the Directorate on Corruption and Economic Offences (DCEO). To further add insult to injury and expose how ill-conceived this appointment was, it was only after Brigadier Sello took office and caused public outcry that he was informed that he would have to resign from either the LDF or the DCEO.
For a position as key as that of the Director General of the DCEO, transparency is key. The expectation from a government that preached meritocracy was that there would be a call for applications, a vetting process which may include objections from the public, and a public interview. The RFP led government did not bother to do even the bare minimum. Instead, Basotho came to know of this appointment through multiple social media posts, after which the LDF Commander admitted in an interview that he had seconded Sello to the DCEO.
The LDF Commander’s assertions were finally confirmed by a memo issued on February 10, 2025, to DCEO staff members informing them of Sello’s appointment. It cannot be gainsaid how important it is for the Director General of the nation’s anti-corruption unit to enjoy public confidence and support.
It also cannot be overemphasised how chilling it was for the LDF to admit that it had “seconded” its own officer to head up what ought to be an independent institution. The DCEO already struggles with its autonomy with various reports pointing to political interference in the functions of DCEO, but the RFP saw it fit to appoint a Director General in the most opaque way possible.
The appointment of the DCEO boss is not the only example of a blatant disregard of meritocracy by the RFP led government. Last month, the Lesotho Communications Authority (LCA) held a press briefing in which amongst others it stated that the Minister had appointed 5 members to the Broadcasting Disputes Resolution Panel.
These appointments came as a surprise to some Basotho as this panel had long been called for by Basotho, so it only stood to reason that once government was ready to constitute it, Basotho would not only be informed of its composition in obiter but rather be taken into the government’s confidence through the entire process.
It is imperative for the RFP led-government to understand that the absence of transparency in appointments casts doubt over the appointed candidates. Many a times, holders of positions are assigned political colours simply because of the lack of transparency in their appointments, and such holders seldom enjoy support, leading to poor performance.
If one were to be drawn to offer advice to the RFP led-government, it would be to take a leaf out of the Judicial Service Commission’s book and make all appointments transparent. Appointment of judges used to be a hotly contested issue in Lesotho with most judges being assigned political colours.
This was because of the manner in which they were appointed, so Basotho simply looked at the appointing regime and assigned a political colour.
However, after changing the manner of appointments by making it more transparent, including calling for public objections, judges now enjoy more public support. The unsavory effects of political appointments are well known in Lesotho, there is no need to reinvent the wheel.
In 2022, Basotho were happy and ready to cash the cheque of meritocracy in appointments, but in the words of Martin Luther King Jr, the cheque came back marked insufficient funds.
Your Trusted Source for News and Insights in Lesotho!
At Newsday Media, we are passionate about delivering accurate, timely, and engaging news and multimedia content to our diverse audience. Founded with the vision of revolutionizing the media landscape in Lesotho, we have grown into a leading hybrid media company that blends traditional journalism with innovative digital platforms.
