Moorosi Tsiane
THE Lesotho Correctional Service (LCS) is facing another legal challenge over its promotion processes, with a fresh court application questioning the elevation of five officers to the rank of Senior Superintendent.
This while a separate challenge to earlier LCS promotions, launched in August, remains pending before the High Court.
In the latest application, Assistant Superintendent (Ass-Sup) Moji Zakea has taken the LCS acting Chief of Corrections, Matingoe Phamotse, and the Minister of Law and Justice, Richard Ramoeletsi, to court over promotions made in January this year.
Ass-Sup Zakea wants the court to review and set aside the promotions, arguing that the process violated the LCS Promotion Guidelines of 2024 and failed to meet key procedural requirements.
He alleges that the promotion exercise was conducted without preliminary interviews and that the shortlisting of candidates was handled by Mr Phamotse’s office instead of the Human Resources Office, as prescribed by the guidelines.
The five officers whose promotions are being challenged are Senior Superintendents Samson Rasehloho, Rethabile Molale, Paki Morakali, Lelingoana Nkofu and ‘Mamatheola Lehohla.
Ass-Sup Zakea further questions whether all the successful candidates met the prescribed qualifications, specifically alleging that SSP Rasehloho lacked the required bachelor’s degree or equivalent qualification and the stipulated experience in handling disciplinary cases.
In his founding affidavit, Ass-Sup Zakea says he has been employed by the LCS since 2007 and was appointed Assistant Superintendent on 22 March 2012. He further states that he has been acting as Superintendent since 1 May 2021.
He applied for promotion to Senior Superintendent after the LCS issued Internal Circular Notice No. 1 of 2026 on 9 January, advertising various vacant positions within the institution. His application was unsuccessful.
Ass-Sup Zakea argues that the failure to conduct preliminary interviews violated a fundamental requirement of the 2024 promotion guidelines.
“A material and central requirement of the prescribed process as stated in the Lesotho Correctional Service Promotion Guidelines of 2024 (the Guidelines), is that candidates undergo preliminary interviews. No preliminary interviews were conducted in respect of the candidates for the position of Senior Superintendent. This integral process was omitted in its entirety,” he argues.
He maintains that the omission deprived him and other applicants of an important assessment stage designed to promote transparency and fairness in the selection process.
Ass-Sup Zakea further accuses Mr Phamotse of taking over the shortlisting process, which he says should have been undertaken by the Human Resources Office before being submitted to him (Phamotse) for approval.
“The Guidelines further contemplate that the Human Resource Office undertakes the shortlisting of candidates and then submits it to the office of the Commissioner for approval. In the present case, the shortlisting was undertaken by and/or emanated directly from the Office of the Commissioner,” he states.
He argues that Mr Phamotse’s authority to approve the shortlist did not entitle his office to assume the Human Resources Office’s responsibility for conducting the shortlisting.
According to Ass-Sup Zakea, the alleged failure to conduct preliminary interviews, coupled with the disputed shortlisting procedure, undermined the integrity of the entire promotion exercise.
“The combined effect of the failure to conduct preliminary interviews and the departure from the prescribed shortlisting procedure rendered the promotion process procedurally irregular, unlawful and invalid,” he contends.
Ass-Sup Zakea says he meets the educational requirement, having obtained a Bachelor of Education degree from the National University of Lesotho, and has also handled disciplinary cases.
“Notwithstanding the aforesaid alleged non-compliance, Senior Superintendent Samson Rasehloho was selected and/or promoted to the rank of Senior Superintendent,” he states.
He says these alleged shortcomings provide additional grounds for the court to review the promotion, should it find it necessary to examine the substantive eligibility of the successful candidates.
Ass-Sup Zakea also believes his experience acting as Superintendent should have counted in his favour during the selection process.
He says he has extensive experience in the position, which he claims should have been considered when assessing the suitability of competing candidates.
Although he acknowledges that SSP Rasehloho may have longer overall service within the LCS, Ass-Sup Zakea argues that his own experience acting as Superintendent was a material consideration, particularly in the event of a deadlock.
He says the guidelines provide for seniority to be considered where candidates are tied, but maintains that his experience in the higher position should also have featured in the assessment.
“The impugned decision was taken pursuant to a process which materially departed from the applicable Guidelines and, additionally, notwithstanding alleged non-compliance with material prescribed requirements. The impugned decision was accordingly unlawful, procedurally irregular, unreasonable and/or irrational,” he argues.
He insists that the alleged irregularities were not minor administrative oversights but went to the heart of the fairness and legality of the promotion exercise.
“The procedural irregularities complained of are material and go to the integrity and lawfulness of the promotion process itself. The appropriate relief is accordingly to review and set aside the impugned promotion and direct that the position be dealt with afresh through a lawful and procedurally compliant process,” he says.
Ass-Sup Zakea is seeking an order reviewing and setting aside the decisions arising from Internal Circular Notice No. 1 of 2026, dated 9 January, insofar as they relate to the selection and promotion of the five officers to Senior Superintendent.
He also wants the court to declare the promotion process unlawful and procedurally irregular for allegedly failing to comply with the applicable statutory and administrative requirements.
Furthermore, he wants Messrs Phamotse and Ramoeletsi, and the Senior Officers Promotion Board to set aside the disputed promotions and conduct the exercise afresh in accordance with the law. These respondents are yet to file their answering papers.
The latest case adds to the legal challenges confronting the LCS over its promotion processes.
The separate challenge launched in August was brought by Assistant Superintendent Karele Poqa, who is contesting the promotions of Assistant Commissioner Neo Moramotse, Senior Superintendent Ramaketekete Rasehloho and Superintendent Sidwell Mothea. He alleges that the three officers were promoted despite lacking the academic qualifications required under LCS promotion guidelines. He also challenges the composition of the Senior Officers Appointment Board, claiming it was improperly constituted because a public officer nominated by the Minister of Public Service was absent. Furthermore, he alleges that candidates’ academic certificates and professional qualifications were never verified during the selection process. He is seeking an order reversing the three promotions and restoring the officers to their previous ranks. The case remains pending before the High Court.