Connect with us

News

‘Tweak Domestic Violence Bill’

Published

on

MASERU – A BILL tabled in parliament to address the lack of a substantive law dealing with domestic violence has attracted criticism, with some analysts and activists saying it fails to adequately address a scourge that has affected Lesotho for decades.
Others said though in need of improvement, the Bill makes strides in tackling domestic violence, which has become a cancer in the country.

Despite being one of the countries most affected by domestic violence, Lesotho currently has no law directly addressing the problem.
To plug the gap, the Ministry of Gender, Sports and Recreation recently initiated a draft Bill which was tabled in parliament by Minister Likeleli Tampane.
The ministry’s Chief Information Officer, Maqalika Matsepe, said the Bill is a result of wide consultations between the ministry and relevant stakeholders and “beneficiaries”.

“It is a broad exercise involving all stakeholders,” said Matsepe.
He said the Bill is currently being taken to communities to get feedback from the people.
“MPs, along with gender ministry officers, are this week out in the villages to verify whether indeed it’s necessary,” he said.
Some human rights lawyers said the Bill contains loopholes that should be addressed before it can be made law.
Advocate Lineo Tsikoane, from NAIRASH Legal Support, is one of those who criticised the Bill.

“They should let themselves think beyond binary terms,” she said.
She cited section 5 of the Bill which states that an application for an interim protection order may be granted without notice or outside court hours.
It should not require a seasoned lawyer to obtain an interim protection order on 2021.
“The expense of an urgent application is prohibitory. It’s archaic to have this kind of condition in 2021. If it’s interim it should be interim, prompt and hassle free for it to be accessible to everyone.”
She noted that although the interim order can be issued outside court hours, it still requires someone who has acquired the services of a lawyer to access it.

Advertisement

“Financial issues aside, there still has to be certain knowledge about law and this is elitist. We need to make use of opportunities that other countries have shown us, such as what happens in South Africa where it is issued at a police station,” said Advocate Tsikoane.
Advocate Tsikoane questioned section 6 of the Bill, querying why one should wait for a commission of a transgression to get a protection order.
“What use is a protection order if I have to be transgressed first?”
“Same people, just a different name,” quipped Advocate Tsikoane while commenting on section 16 (1-3) of the Bill relating to the establishment of a family court.

“We risk having the same results. Doing the same thing twice and expecting a different result? Why are we not going out to properly establish and constitute family courts?” she queried.
She said statistics between 2003 and 2013 showed that 86 percent of women have at some point experienced violence in their lives.
“Why are we doing the same thing and expecting different results? Why doesn’t the Bill require a properly constituted, trained and capacitated family court if we are really saying we want to fight this?”
She said there are limitations in section 18, which relates to counselling.

“I am not disputing its relevance but it has limitations and it has to be broader. A tailor-made solution such as counselling is not the only way, was it so integral that it had to have its own section? This denotes that everything can be solved by just talking…”
“There is a lot of burden beyond counseling. Domestic violence has a lot more to do with poverty. Just being through counselling doesn’t mean one’s life or circumstances change automatically. We shouldn’t have specifically mentioned counseling. Rather, we should have a complainant-responsive remedy which can be counselling, separation support, housing etc.”
She said the Bill is not progressive particularly section 19, which deals with restorative justice.

“There has to be guidelines; power should be factored to have boundaries,” she said.
As a deeply patriarchal society, the composition of the council is “Ok” but in constituting such councils the law should pay special attention to the complainant, gender bias and stereotyping.
“There has to be boundaries and guidance.”
She said section 22 of the Bill on non-compliance with restorative justice resolution burdens the complainant.
“Why should a complainant bear so much burden?”

Advocate Tsikoane suggested that the draft team should “consider opinions of non-gender conforming persons, victims and survivors, ordinary Basotho, organisations and institutions that deal with survivors and institutions that empower and create an equal society”.
“I feel this was a noble effort but it’s too late, it reads like a Bill from 1993. It doesn’t reflect the strides that we have made as a nation with regards to what we have seen and observed. We don’t have to think out of the box as this has been the reality of many Basotho and it has to reflect that,” she said, adding: “Personally, I think the Bill should be thrown away.”
“Stakeholders should be assembled, break it apart for 10 days, give them a break for public consultations, bring them back for another 10 days, consolidate, take them back again to the community and there will be a comprehensive, more inclusive Bill that will represent the Lesotho of today.

Advertisement

Let our law reflect the path that we have travelled,” suggested Advocate Tsikoane.
The People’s Matrix, in collaboration with Advocate Rethabile Mathealira-Molapo, suggested that the definition of domestic violence should include intimidation, harassment, stalking, damage to property and other acts that constitute domestic violence.
“The definition (contained in the Bill) is too limited,” she said.
However she commended the Bill for recognising the discrimination experienced by certain groups of people by virtue of their age, disability, sexual orientation and gender identity.

“The list has been extended to be more comprehensive to cover sex so as to include intersex people, gender expression, which is the way people express their gender identity through behaviours, including language, body language, dress, or mannerisms. We have included economic activity should a person be violated for their economic activity on the basis that it is not lawful legal activity,” she said.
Mathealira-Molapo also commended the Bill for seeking to abolish some of the existing abusive practices that degrade children and women such as forced child marriages.

“We need to provide protection for both children and adults forced into marriage as the most important element of any marriage should be consent,” she said.
She suggested that interpretation should include abusive practices, domestic violence acts between any number of people regardless of relationship, ability or disability, age, sex, sexual orientation and gender identity and expression.
Portions of the Marriage Act providing for the marriages of children should be repealed.

“This Act should provide an opportunity to harmonise all laws dealing with the affairs of children, especially with regard to marriage and all forms of sexual activity and sexual violence involving children,” Mathealira-Molapo said.
“If courts other than the family court are permitted to deal with domestic violence acts there may be inconsistencies in sentences handed down. Basotho courts’ jurisdiction is to apply Customary Law and there may be resistance to apply the Domestic Violence Act. This may deny victims the protection they so desperately need.”
She also suggested that the family court be a court at the level of the Magistrates Court, with reviews and appeals lying with the High Court and the Court of Appeal respectively.

“It is recommended that cases of domestic violence be exclusively adjudicated over by the family court, which may be housed even at the local court premises. The proposed definition is too limited, namely on one form of abuse and the people it affected,” she said.
She recommended changing the wording to avoid making the interpretation too restrictive.
“This is to offer better protection for people who may be living together in an intimate relationship regardless of sex, gender, sexual orientation or expression.

Advertisement

She said physical abuse should be any act or conduct that is of such a nature as to cause bodily pain, harm or danger to life, limb or health or which impairs the health or development of the victim; and includes assault, criminal intimidation or criminal force.
“The original definition should end with “and other forms of physical harm” instead of “and other essential…”
Regarding sexual abuse, she suggested an addition: (e & f) any conduct that abuses, humiliates, degrades or otherwise violates the sexual integrity of the complainant or a related person, regardless of sex, sexual orientation, gender, gender identity or expression, whether or not such conduct constitutes a sexual offence as contemplated in the Criminal Law (Sexual Offences Act, 2003 (Act No. 3 of 2003) and Penal Code Act, 2010 (Act No. 6 of 2012).

She said stealthing would ensure that where consent is given on the basis that a condom be used during intercourse, and the alleged offender either removes the condom or does not put on a condom at all, and intentionally does not inform the other person, then the other person’s consent is taken to have been negated.
“This is to take into account that emotional and psychological abuse often manifests itself in physiological symptoms,” she said.
Stealthing refers to the conduct of a man who removes a condom midway through sex despite agreeing to wear one when intimacy started.

On section 7 of the Bill relating to contents of a protection order, she suggested adding the nature of domestic violence and relationship in relation to the vacating of shared residence.
“Entering a residence shared by the complainant and the respondent: Provided that the court may impose this prohibition only if it appears to be in the best interests of the complainant taking into consideration the nature of the domestic relation in relation to rights to the ownership of property.”
Other suggested additions are on the seizure of arms and dangerous weapons.

On Section 9.(1) the court must order a member of the Lesotho Mounted Police Service to seize any arms or dangerous weapons in the possession or under the control of a respondent, if the court is satisfied on the evidence placed before it. The evidence includes any affidavits supporting an application referred to in section 4(1), which are that (a) the respondent has threatened or expressed the intention to kill or injure himself or herself, or any person in a domestic relationship, whether or not by means of such arm or dangerous weapon; or (b) possession of such arm or dangerous weapon is not in the best interests of the respondent or any other person in a domestic relationship. This would be a result of the respondent’s (i) state of mind or mental condition; (ii) inclination to violence; or (iii) use of or dependence on intoxicating liquor or drugs.

In part IV related to institutions, section 10 of the Bill on duties of a police officer in respect of domestic violence, she suggested the following: 10(1) … social workers and relevant expertise
10(4) … gender-sensitive and gender affirming officer instead
10(7) request for clarity of context of authority
10(8) accountability for incompetent service.

Advertisement

“Police officers are not primarily experts in this field and are further often transferred out of units. The social worker can work hand in hand with police officers for purposes of investigations,” she said.
Mathealira-Molapo said in section 11 on records of domestic violence, section 11(2) should ensure that original forms must be sent to the commissioner of police monthly. Section 11(3) should ensure that statistics are compiled quarterly and presented to parliament quarterly, she suggested.

’Mapule Motsopa

Advertisement

News

BAP appeals judge’s ruling

Published

on

MASERU

THE Basotho Action Party (BAP)’s Central Executive Committee has appealed against Justice Molefi Makara’s ruling that it has no powers to suspend Motlatsi Maqelepo and Tello Kibane.

Maqelepo is the BAP deputy leader while Kibane is the chairman of the caucus in parliament.

In a ruling delivered on Tuesday, Justice Makara said the party’s disciplinary committee did not have the powers to discipline the duo when there is a pending High Court case.

The judge also said the executive committee cannot suspend the two when there is a court case seeking to interdict it from doing so.

“The matter is sub judice and it has to be so treated,” Justice Makara said on Tuesday.

The BAP’s central executive committee suspended Maqelepo for seven years and Kibane for five years beginning last Tuesday.

Maqelepo’s suspension will end on January 7, 2032 while Kibane’s will be until January 7, 2030.

Their suspension letters from the BAP deputy secretary general Victoria Qheku, say they should not participate in any of the party’s activities.

They were suspended in absentia after they refused to attend the disciplinary hearing, which they said was illegal.

Yesterday, the BAP leader, Professor Nqosa Mahao, filed an appeal against the High Court ruling.

Professor Mahao, as the first applicant along with the BAP and the disciplinary committee, argued that Justice Makara had erred and misdirected himself when he said he had jurisdiction to interfere with the internal matters of the party.

He reasoned that the High Court ignored the prayers that are purely constitutional under the 1993 Lesotho Constitution.

He said the court erred and misdirected itself “in granting the interim prayers in the face of a jurisdictional objection where no exceptional circumstances existed, especially where the applicants would have remedies in due cause”.

“The Court a quo erred and misdirected itself in granting the interim reliefs retrospectively,” the court papers read.

Maqelepo had earlier argued that there is a court case that is pending in the High Court seeking to interdict the party from charging them in its structures without approval of the special conference he is calling.

He said the party leadership should have awaited the outcome of the case before proceeding with any disciplinary action.

“The party that is led by a professor of law continues to do dismissals despite the issue being taken to the courts,” Maqelepo said.

He said their fate in the party is in the hands of the special conference.

He appealed to all the party constituencies to continue writing letters proposing the special conference.

Maqelepo, Kibane, Hilda Van Rooyen, and ’Mamoipone Senauoane are accused of supporting a move to remove Professor Mahao from his ministerial position last year.

They were part of BAP members who asked Prime Minister Sam Matekane to fire Professor Mahao, who at the same time was pushing for the reshuffle of Tankiso Phapano, the principal secretary for the Ministry of Energy.

When Matekane ignored Professor Mahao’s demands, the latter withdrew the BAP from the coalition government. That decision was fiercely opposed by the party’s four MPs.

Maqelepo started touting members from constituencies to call for the special conference to reverse Professor Mahao and the central executive committee’s decision.

The central executive committee issued a circular stopping Maqelepo’s rallies but he continued, with the support of the other MPs.

In the BAP caucus of six MPs, it is only Professor Mahao and ’Manyaneso Taole who support the withdrawal from the government.

Majara Molupe

Continue Reading

News

Widow fights stepchildren

Published

on

LERIBE

A Butha-Buthe widow is fighting her stepchildren in court after she accused them of making illegal withdrawals of cash from her bank account.

’Maletšela Letšela told the High Court in Tšifa-li-Mali that her four stepchildren had taken advantage of her age and gained access to her money through her late husband’s death certificate which they used to withdraw some cash.

She did not reveal how much had been withdrawn from the account.

Letšela pleaded with the court to order the children to return her late husband’s death certificate.

Maletšela was the second wife to the late Mohlabakobo Letšela.

Mohlabakobo’s first wife died in 1991.

Letšela told the court in an urgent application that she married Mohlabakobo through customary rites in 1999 and they subsequently solemnised their union by civil rights in November 2003.

“I should state that I married my husband as a widower, his wife having passed away leaving behind four children who are respondents in the matter,” Letšela said.

Letšela has two children with Mohlabakobo.

She said at the time of the first wife’s death, they had already amassed property in the form of a residential house in Mokhotlong and rental flats in Butha-Buthe.

“I have always considered this property as belonging to the children of my husband’s first marriage and continue to hold that view,” Letšela said.

“During my marriage and before my husband’s death, we built a residential property at Makopo, Ha-Letšolo, in the district of Butha-Buthe,” she said.

“I had helped my husband to raise his children as my own and we have been living together as a family at my matrimonial home located at Makopo, Ha-Letšolo, until he passed away in October 2024, after a long illness.”

Letšela said after the death of her husband, they worked peacefully with his children without any sense of animosity and they appreciated her role as the widow and joint owner of her husband’s estate.

“This feeling is aided by a written deposition signed by Refiloe and Lietsietsi Letšela (Mohlabakobo’s children from the first marriage) nominating me as the heir in respect of monies held in my husband’s name at both the First National Bank and Standard Bank of Lesotho,” she said.

She said Mohlabakobo, with the aid of the family, wrote letters to appoint her heir to his estate in the event of his death.

She said even the children rightfully appointed her as the beneficiary in respect of these monies with a clear understanding that as a spouse to their late father, she was the rightful person to claim for benefits deriving out of his estate.

She said with the aid of the letter, she was able to withdraw funds from the banks to cover the funeral costs.

“Shortly after my husband’s burial, I was approached by Refiloe, who requested an original copy of my husband’s death certificate claiming she wanted to trace funds in my husband’s bank account held at Post Bank in South Africa,” she said.

“Sensing no harm, I released the copy to her and she left in the company of her brother and sister.”

She said she had no sense at that point whatsoever that Refiloe’s intentions were malicious.

“By that time Refiloe had already assumed possession of my husband’s phone and vehicle, and I did not complain owing to my old age and my understanding that

I did not know how to operate a smart phone, and my lack of skills to drive a car,” she said.

The siblings, she said, never brought any report regarding the funds they were to trace.

“I got suspicious of their actions and immediately sought intervention from the Butha-Buthe police.”

The police called Refiloe instructing her to return the death certificate, but she informed the officer that the copy was now in the custody of her sibling Litsietsi in South Africa.

Litsietsi later responded that she would “return the certificate on Wednesday, November 20, 2024 but that did not happen rather they are now claiming they never took it”.

“Sensing that the situation had gone out of hand, I decided to go to Post Bank with the aim of tracing the movement of these children,” she said.

Letšela said the bank manager told her that the children had instituted a claim as beneficiaries of the funds using the same death certificate.

The manager, she said, advised her to secure a letter of authority from the Master of the High Court for them to handle her case.

The Master of the High Court, she said, could not help her because she did not have the original copy of the certificate.

“I have no other alternative but to seek the court’s intervention as I was advised no actions could be taken without the court’s order.”

’Malimpho Majoro

Continue Reading

News

Knives out for Molelle

Published

on

MASERU

KNORX Molelle’s appointment as the Director General of the Directorate on Corruption and Economic Offences (DCEO) in February 2023 could have been illegal.

The Law Society of Lesotho has told Prime Minister Sam Matekane that Molelle was appointed without being admitted as a legal practitioner in Lesotho, as required by law.

The society claims the information came from a whistleblower on January 2 and was corroborated by its roll of legal practitioners in Lesotho.

The society says the appointment violates section 4 of the Prevention of Corruption and Economic Offences Act 1999 which states that a person shall not be appointed as the DCEO director general unless they have been admitted as a legal practitioner in terms of the Legal Practitioners Act.

In the letter, Advocate Ithabeleng Phamotse, the society’s secretary, tells Matekane that this requirement “is not a mere procedural formality but a substantive qualification essential to the lawful appointment of the Director General”.

“The absence of such qualification fatally impairs the appointment ab initio, rendering it null and void from the outset,” Advocate Phamotse says in the letter written on Tuesday.

The society argues that if left unaddressed the illegality undermines the credibility, effectiveness and legality of the DCEO’s operations and exposes the kingdom to serious risks, including challenges to the lawfulness of decisions and actions made by Molelle.

“Should it be confirmed that the appointment was made in contravention of the mandatory legal requirements,” Advocate Phamotse said, “we respectfully urge you to take immediate corrective action to rectify this glaring irregularity”.

Advocate Phamotse tells the prime minister that if the appointment is not corrected, the society would be “left with no alternative but to institute legal proceedings to protect the interests of justice and uphold the rule of law in Lesotho”.

“We trust that you will accord this matter your highest priority and act decisively to avert further damage to the integrity of our governance structures.”

The Prime Minister’s spokesman, Thapelo Mabote, said they received the letter but Matekane had not yet read it yesterday.

Matekane is on leave and is expected back in the office on January 14.

Questions over the validity of his appointment come as Molelle is being haunted by the damaging audio clips that were leaked last week.

The clips were clandestinely recorded by Basotho National Party leader, Machesetsa Mofomobe.

In some of the clips, Molelle appears to be describing Matekane and his deputy Justice Nthomeng Majara as idiots. He also appears to be calling Law Minister Richard Ramoeletsi a devil.

In other clips, he seems to be discussing cases. thepost has not independently verified the authenticity of the audio clips.

Staff Reporter

Continue Reading
Advertisement

ADVERTISEMENT

Advertisement
Advertisement

Trending