. . . after missing 48-hour ultimatum
Mohloai Mpesi
A disgruntled candidate aspiring to become a Commissioner in the Independent Electoral Commission (IEC), Khosi Emmanuel Makubakube, is taking a recruitment agency to court after accusing it of “unfairly” disqualifying him from the candidates’ shortlist.
Workplace Solutions-Lesotho is the agency contracted to recruit the IEC Commissioners.
In a letter to the Workplace Solutions-Lesotho’s Managing Director, Mampukula Esther ‘Mota, dated 30 October, 2025, Makubakube’s lawyer, Advocate (Adv) Christopher Leputhing, questioned the way in which he was disqualified from the shortlist for IEC Commissioners’ recruitment currently under way.
Workplace Solutions argues that Mr Makubakube is a public servant and that renders him ineligible, according to the Constitution.
But Adv Leputhing argues that the agency received that information from an “anonymous objector” who should be identified.
In a copy of the letter seen by the Sunday Express, the lawyer gives Workplace Solutions a 48-hour ultimatum within which to provide Mr Makubakube with information stating the basis of his disqualification.
Adv Leputhing told the Sunday Express yesterday that he had already completed drafting the application which he is going to file tomorrow (Monday) in the High Court after the 48-hour ultimatum given to the agency to respond lapsed.
The process of recruiting new commissioners is currently under way as the contracts of three incumbent Commissioners: Mphasa Mokhochane, Dr Karabo Mokobocho-Mohlakoana, and T?oeu Petlane are set to expire in December (next month).
“Faceless objector”
Adv Leputhing further asserts that the agency failed to disclose the identity of the objector, who said Mr Makubakube is a public officer and is therefore ineligible to contest for that post, according to section 154 (2) of the Constitution.
“You purported to disqualify him, suggesting there is a person or some persons who objected to his potential employment as Commissioner of IEC, citing he is the Public Officer within the contemplation of section 154 (2) of the Constitution.
“We have confirmed that client asked you to discover the objection form filed with your office, reasons for objection and identity of the objector(s) so that he could address the objection.
“He was suspecting that you were trying to use supposed objections as an excuse for not shortlisting him and eventually elbowing him out of the competition. You failed to reveal the identity of the objector and reasons for the objection which client intended that they be interrogated,” the letter reads.
Adv Leputhing said the agency had relied on “hearsay” therefore disqualifying his client was unreasonable if the objector remains faceless.
On realising that his name was not among the shortlisted candidates announced on Lesotho Television, Mr Makubakube engaged his lawyer to raise his objection.
“When client was contemplating what steps could be taken to confront this extreme problem of your inability to avail the requested documents, he was really faced with a fait accompli when he saw in the TV Lesotho news bulletin of 28th October 2025 that you had shortlisted candidates and you were embarking on interviews starting on the 29th of October 2025.
“In these circumstances, while we are very conscious of the problems caused to our client by your inability to disclose the reasons for the objection, the standpoint of our client is that the suggestion that there was an objection is inadmissible hearsay.
“In the alternative the use of anonymous objectors makes your decision to disqualify him unreasonable if the identity of the objectors could have been disclosed during the recruitment process,” he said.
Adv Leputhing asserted that the Commission should furnish them with the identity of the objector and information they used to arrive at the decision to disqualify his client.
48-hour ultimatum expires
Makubakube demands that the agency discloses the identity of the person said to be objecting his eligibility to contest for a position among IEC Commissioners.
“We demand that you provide the identity of the objector, the objection from and any information you used to take a decision to disqualify our client within 48 hours in order to allow us take further instructions and devise an appropriate strategy of addressing the conditions best suited to tackle the problem regarding the nature of the power you exercised to disqualify our client.
Adv Leputhing yesterday told this paper the ultimatum had expired.
“…they failed to honour that time period and I have already finished drafting the application and I am filling it on Monday,” he told Sunday Express yesterday.
“The decision you took to disqualify our client is not one by administrative body and all persons shortlisted must be advised about the challenge client is mounting to the shortlisting and interviews in order to arrest the saga of related matters from being prolonged,” he said, in the letter.
The letter adds, “There should be predictability, consistency and integrity in recruiting the Commissioners of IEC, hence we require you to discover your terms of reference for the assignment of recruiting the IEC Commissioners.
“It would appear you proceeded on a wrong assumption that our client is Public Officer. This, it has to be said, is totally unacceptable and indeed highly improper. Our client was not given a hearing.
“This is despite the fact that he went on extra mile in providing you with his contract of employment which confirms that the provisions of section 154 (2) of the Constitution do not apply to him, looking at the broader schematisation of the provisions of section 66A of the Constitution of Lesotho.
“This explains your vague, flimsy and largely unintelligible conclusion that client is a Public Officer. This cannot serve as a sound basis for not shortlisting our client.
“It is necessary to be emphatic on this point as the far-reaching implications of your decision cannot be ameliorated except by starting the whole process afresh to allow us deal with the alleged objection where a competent body will have full control over the process as your company is having conflict of interest.”
“This perhaps takes us to the nature of power you exercised and whether our client will have adequate redress under alternative procedures before the High Court of Lesotho.”
Recruitment agency responds
However, Workplace Solutions-Lesotho’s Managing Consultant, Lerato Sekoati-Kabi told Sunday Express that Mr Makubakube was barking up the wrong tree.
She said the consultant company did not disqualify Mr Makubakube, as that is within the purview of the Forum of Political Parties registered with IEC.
She said Mr Makubakube was given a chance to object if he felt that he was being unfairly disqualified, which he did and he confirmed to the agency that he is a civil servant.
She said they were working on 40 CVs, four of which had been disqualified.
“It is the Forum of Political Parties registered with IEC that disqualified him. His letter is not truthful. Workplace Solutions gave him a form that he should object if he is disqualified erroneously.
“He objected, although it is not clear why he objects when he says he is still a public officer. He agreed that he is a public officer.
“I am a public officer”
The agency told the Sunday Express yesterday that the complainant had clearly owned up that he is a public officer.
“He ticked that the disqualification is inaccurate, but he stated that “I am a public officer” and he objects the fact that this makes him not eligible for the position of IEC Commissioner. He said so far as legal requirements is concerned, in particular, the National Assembly Act 2011 section 136 “I am compliant”. that’s what he said,” she said.
She said Mr Makubakube could have been under the impression that he was going to resign after the appointments have been made.
“Maybe he understood that we should wait until the appointment is made, then he will resign from his work, which doesn’t make sense because they were all aware that the process is going to take a very short time.
“So, whether he would have resigned in 10 days so that he becomes eligible and considered at that time… The law is clear that you may not be considered if you are a public officer, a member of National Assembly, or an officer of a political party. The law is clear,” she said.
She added, “I did not accept that letter because it was saying I should state whether I have the locus standi to object. I explained to the messenger that I think he is lost because we did not disqualify eligible people.
“The forum of political parties identified ineligible people, luckily, they know them better than us because they are politicians.”
Background
The Council of State advised His Majesty on 10 June 2025, as the appointing authority of IEC, to advise the leaders of political parties to start the process of recruiting new commissioners.
On the 15 July this year, the Clerk of the National Assembly, Advocate Fine Maema KC, wrote to the Chief Whip of the National Assembly, Lethole Lethole to facilitate the forwarding of the attachment to all political parties.
The three incumbent Commissioners on 2 June 2025 expressed interest to have their contracts extended.
In his letter addressed to the Government Secretary, Mr Mokhochane, who is the Chairman of IEC asked that his contract be extended.
“I was appointed on the 14th of December 2020 as the Chairman of the IEC and that first term employment contract will be coming to an end on the 14th of December 2025.
“When I joined the IEC in December 2020, I found that my predecessors had long been out of office. That status of not having the Commission for a long time had left the institution in a vulnerable . . . situation.
“This time around I have a vivid feeling that sad history will not repeat itself. I take this opportunity to submit my application to the Council of State, as an indication that I have a desire to be offered further engagement, to participate in my second and final term as a member of the commission for the IEC,” he said.
Similarly, Mr Petlane also wrote a letter seeking renewal or extension of his contract.
“Please find enclosed for your conveyance to the appropriate authorities, my submission indicating and supporting my interest in renewal of my appointment as Commissioner with the IEC for a further term.
“This is submitted in line with the provisions of the Constitution and my current contract as Commissioner,” his letter reads.
“I write here to express my interest in extending my appointment as Commissioner with IEC for a further term, as per the provisions of my current contract (2020-25), and the constitution of Lesotho,” Dr Mokobocho-Mohlakoana’s letter also reds.
Section 66 (7) of the Constitution as amended by the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution Act, 2004 (Act No.8 of 2004) reads “A member of Electoral Commission shall hold office for such term being not more than five years as is specified in his instrument of appointment and may be reappointed for only one further term not exceeding five years.”