…amid ongoing forensic audit
Mohloai Mpesi
THE suspended Head of Finance at the Lesotho Electricity Company (LEC), ‘Makabelo Matsoso, has resigned amid an intense forensic audit into the company’s financial affairs.
Ms Matsoso tendered her resignation on 9 June 2025 and began serving her notice the following day. Her notice period is scheduled to end on 9 July 2025.
Her departure comes just two weeks after Auditor-General Mathabo Makenete launched a forensic audit on 27 May 2025. Members of the Lesotho Defence Force (LDF) have been deployed to provide security for the auditors as they carry out their work.
Ms Matsoso was among several senior executives suspended earlier this year. The others include Managing Director Mohlomi Seitlheko, Head of Corporate Services Moipone Mashale, Head of Strategy and Growth Limpho Mokhesi, Head of Information Technology Sakhele Mapetja, Head of Customer Experience Lebohang Mohasoa, Head of Legal, Risk and Compliance Selebalo Ntepe, Head of Internal Audit Thato Matsoso, Head of Operations Serolo Tikoe and Corporate Secretary Advocate Khotso Nthontho.
Mr Nthontho resigned last month. However, it remains unclear why he opted to leave the company amid the audit.
Ms Matsoso joined LEC in 2021 and held the finance portfolio until her suspension. When contacted, Ms Matsoso confirmed she was serving her notice but declined to comment, citing restrictions on speaking to the media.
Her resignation comes as the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) continues to grill LEC management over allegations of mismanagement, entrenched corruption, fraud, and financial irregularities as highlighted in an internal audit report released in March 2025.
Sources within LEC claim Ms Matsoso’s resignation may be an attempt to distance herself from damning revelations expected from the ongoing forensic audit.
Sources within LEC suggest the timing of her resignation is ominous.
“There is growing speculation that she may be jumping ship before the full extent of the audit findings are made public,” one source told this publication.
“People are nervous. The figures in the audit are serious — this could end careers.”
Another source added: “Everyone at LEC is watching this forensic audit closely. We believe she left because she knows what’s coming. The internal audit already pointed fingers at her department.”
Previous audit reports had already flagged significant financial discrepancies linked to her office, suggesting systemic failures and potential misconduct.
Findings revealed that procurement rules were often disregarded, with contracts awarded without competitive bidding or the required quotations. Payments were routinely processed without supporting documents such as invoices or delivery notes. Some vendors reportedly received double payments, and there were cases where Ms Matsoso allegedly approved staff cash advances without proper authorisation or reconciliation.
Bank reconciliations were either not performed or poorly documented, while statutory deductions such as PAYE, VAT, and pension contributions were frequently not remitted to authorities. The audit also noted conflicts of interest, where suppliers were allegedly linked to finance department staff. Petty cash was reportedly used for large transactions that should have gone through formal procurement channels, and the overall state of record-keeping was found to be substandard, with missing or poorly maintained documents.
Auditor-General’s findings
For the financial years 2022 and 2023, the Auditor-General identified several major discrepancies in LEC’s financial statements:
2022
- A discrepancy of M21.9 million between the debtors listing and the financial statements.
- A further M20.3 million in missing debtor statements, undermining the accuracy of trade debtor figures.
- M19 million difference between VAT returns and revenue in the financial statements.
- An unsupported prior-year adjustment of M40.9 million in the statement of changes in equity.
2023
- Journals amounting to M408.9 million lacked supporting documentation and authorisation.
- A M37.9 million variance in trade payables between the age analysis and financial statements.
- M47.2 million in customer deposits remained unallocated despite having payer details.
- Inventory was understated by M32.1 million due to incorrect scheduling.
- M17.8 million in sales agent prepayments were misclassified as receivables without support.
- Deferred tax assets worth M205.2 million were reported without computations or proper disclosures.
- Mobile agent balances differed by M17.1 million, with unverified journal entries.
The Auditor-General’s report, covering the period ending March 2023, concluded that LEC could not account for M568 million due to missing supporting documents. The severity of the situation prompted the Auditor-General to seek PAC’s intervention.
Additionally, audits revealed that some LEC staff loaded electricity tokens for clients without payment, resulting in a loss of M1.8 million, as documented in an internal report allegedly authored by Ms Matsoso.
Further, the 2022 audit report reaffirmed discrepancies in debtors’ accounts during Ms Matsoso’s tenure.
“There is a difference of M21,918,475 between the debtors listing and the financial statements. Furthermore, the client failed to provide debtor statements amounting to M20,346,125. Both matters imply that the trade debtors in the financial statements might have been misstated.”
“The client’s monthly VAT returns differed from the revenue reported in the financial statements by M19,057,774, rendering the revenue figures unreliable. Additionally, an amount of M40,872,993 reported as a prior-year adjustment lacked any supporting documentation.”
LEC’s position
However, LEC Acting Managing Director Nathaniel Maphathe has made it clear that Ms Matsoso is not off the hook. He said should the ongoing forensic audit implicate her, she would be required to answer for her actions.
“Yes, it’s true that she resigned about two weeks ago — I don’t recall the exact date, but it was in June,” Maphathe said. “The forensic audit is still ongoing, so we’ll wait for its findings to determine whether she is implicated or not. She is still serving her month-long notice as per her contract, so technically, she has not fully exited the company.”
He stressed that a resignation does not absolve her of accountability.
“If the audit reveals any wrongdoing on her part, she will not be able to evade responsibility. The forensic auditor’s findings will determine that. To me, there’s no difference — resigned or not, she will have to answer.”
Maphathe further explained that management informed Ms Matsoso in writing that she would be required to cooperate with the investigation when necessary.
“She is still within the company because we haven’t paid her any terminal benefits. She will be expected to respond to any audit-related queries. Even in our acceptance letter, we made it clear that since the audit is still in progress, she must avail herself whenever her input is required,” he said.