The Advocates for the Supremacy of the Constitution (Section 2) have strongly condemned the Lesotho Defence Force (LDF) (Amendment) Bill, 2025, arguing that it violates constitutional rights and threatens national security.
The bill, which was tabled by Minister in the Prime Minister’s Office, Limpho Tau before the National Assembly on Monday this week, seeks to alter the retirement age structure within the LDF.
Tau later told journalists that the bill was intended to ensure development of the army through retention of critical skills and capabilities in alignment with global standards.
However, Section 2 has labeled the bill as discriminatory and unjust, imploring the government to suspend its approval pending an open, inclusive consultation with legal scholars, civil society, members of the public, and LDF members of all ranks, among others.
The civil society organisation asserts that the bill contradicts Sections 18 and 19 of the Constitution, which prohibit discrimination and guarantee equality before the law. The organisation warns that the legislation could divide the military and destabilise the nation.
The bill essentially increases the retirement ages of some of the top ranking officers within the army, while decreasing other lower ranking officers’ retirement ages.
“The government touts this bill as a step toward professionalism and global alignment, yet its provisions reek of arbitrary and unjust discrimination that disproportionately punishes lower-ranked soldiers.
“Consider the following: junior soldiers face forced retirement as early as 48 years, while officers enjoy contract extensions up to 62 years, a glaring disparity with no rational basis. Special exemptions coddle medical officers, lawyers, and chaplains, permitting service until 60 years, while other personnel are cast aside earlier without operational justification,” statement reads.
“This institutionalised bias, which disproportionately burdens soldiers often hailing from marginalised communities, constitutes discrimination devoid of military necessity, a direct assault on Section 18.”
Violation of equality before the law
The organisation also argues that the Bill undermines Section 19 of the Constitution by creating an unfair hierarchy within the LDF.
“Why are officers deemed fit to serve past 60 while soldiers are discarded far earlier, despite serving the same force? No explanation is offered,” Section 2 questioned.
The Bill’s early retirement mandate could result in economic instability for lower-ranked soldiers, leaving them without reintegration support or career alternatives.
Section 2 has warned that the bill could divide the LDF into privileged officers and disenfranchised soldiers, leading to unrest.
“By favouring officers with extended service while casting soldiers aside, it sows seeds of resentment that could split the army into two hostile camps: one of empowered officers and another of alienated, low-ranked soldiers,” Section 2 cautioned.
The organisation further warns that disillusioned soldiers could be radicalised due to their perceived abandonment by the system they served.
Section 2 challenged the government’s justification for the bill, arguing that it lacks a logical basis, and has warned that it would take legal action if the bill passes.
“We pledge to seek redress before the High Court should this Bill pass unchanged, safeguarding the rights of all Basotho against this affront to justice,” Section 2 said.
Authored by our expert team of writers and editors, with thorough research.
