Makhabane Maluke
Parliament has a major role to play in the various practices which characterise parliamentary democracies. The organisational set up of a parliament and attitude of its key actors and functionaries matter considerably. It is these that determine how its various roles are enacted, to make either a good or bad impact. What brand does Lesotho have, to contribute to the development of parliamentary democracy?
Lesotho parliament is correctly bicameral- except that this does not guarantee efficiency. The National Assembly and Senate are dubbed as Lower and Upper House, respectively. What actually makes them lower or upper? Could this be just to mimic other bicameral parliaments elsewhere? Many such parliaments have their houses with almost equal powers. That is not so for the parliament of Lesotho.
Many non-Westminster parliaments have their Senate Houses as a real upper houses to denote their primacy over the other houses. In Lesotho, such primacy lies in the National Assembly: it originates the Prime Minister, legislation gets introduced there only; can propose a cut motion to reduce a proposed budget; as it once did when Senate budget was cut by M1,ooo,000. Senate could not and did not challenge that.
The 2014 political turmoil that led to an early election was a cup of tea for the National Assembly where the no confidence motion in the government had been tabled. The subsequent prorogation however affected both houses. This was another demonstration that Senate was just an extension of the elected house. If our bicameralism was well developed, only the National Assembly which had problems ought to be prorogued and Senate just adjourned, if it really had to. Secondly, the kind of Senate we have had to proceed on dissolution to ensure that it could be used through nomination of unelected senators after the election. This renders it to be only a source of talent for the Executive.
In Lesotho, tendency is to exaggerate roles and relationships. There is currently a wrong impression that parliament has power to call the Executive to order in its exercise of discretion. There is hope for use of the parliamentary platform to get the reengaged LDF Commander removed. That exaggerate the role of parliament, if the prolonged stay-away in intended to achieve that.
A cabinet system of government confers on the Prime Minister, formidable responsibility as principal centre of power. It is exactly this, through the not-so-well considered handling that led to the collapse of the first coalition government. The National Assembly had watched, either helplessly or with sympathy, as the Executive tried to use its power; and going even further to pin its hope on an early election. Here, parliament failed to safe the 8th Parliament by selecting not to table the motion of no confidence before the House. Parliament actually failed the nation because the unnecessary early election cost the nation financially; except that what the opposition wanted was achieved. In any parliamentary democracy, the Executive has a unique role: to protect itself against threats. Government may not wish itself away or shoot itself in the foot like the first coalition did. The National Assembly deserved to blame that it facilitated that through its failure to act.
How the Lesotho parliament fares in its effort to promote democracy may reveal whether or not there is any growth, or stagnation or even a decline. It is the organisational set up and relationships with other actors that will demonstrate this. One wonders whether Lesotho will ever find it in the public interest, to reserve the position of Deputy Speaker for the opposition. This is a convention in other Westminster parliaments. In yet others, composition of parliamentary committees ensures that a Chairperson from a ruling party is deputised by a member from the opposition. A participant from Lesotho in one forum of democratic parliaments was shocked to learn that the Speaker in the unicameral parliament of Sri Lanka was from the opposition. Can such arrangements be considered to improve the attitudes of political actors here in Lesotho?
Does our bicameralism serve any meaningful democratic purpose to justify its continuation? In our local understanding of the lower and upper description of our houses, one wonders why the Lesotho constitution did not provide for joint-sittings to resolve disagreements relating to legislation. Rather, it opts for a referendum. That has to be so, because for a never mentioned real reason that Senate has no democratic mandate to fight democratic wars with democratically elected representatives. Direct involvement of the electorate was inevitable. This also renders our Senate to be a unique Upper House, if it really is.
Does this not urge one to wonder if the current nature of our Senate has any relevance in a parliamentary democracy? The National Assembly changed phases many times while the Senate only changed faces of its membership. The goodness of Senate does not go beyond giving a second thought to what originates from the elected representatives. To redress this, some form of election could be introduced in that house, or the Botswana route of a single wholly elected House and a House of Chiefs which gets convened only when there is need be the option.
It is possible there will be many new changes to the National Assembly because of the never ending pressure to adapt. One good change could be to provide for Deputy Speaker to chair the committee of the whole (House), and when the house resumes to receive a report, the Speaker should preside. In situations the two are from the ruling and the opposition that would be very interesting as that may reveal political maturity to work together.
When newly elected members take their seats, they either take an oath or affirm. Tendency in Lesotho is to take oath. The kind of oath is actually an appeal to God and promise that the oath (to perform floor and committee work) shall be kept. How does Lesotho fare in respect to such oaths?
There is always an era in public life. The 8th and 9th Parliaments form an interesting era in the political history of Lesotho. Firstly, why did government backbenchers of 2014 opt to challenge the no confidence motion in the government through courts of law? Were they afraid to see a house sanctioned change of government, something which the constitution provides for? They only wanted to disable that constitutional route which the opposition had started to walk. Declaration of unusually long prorogation followed. This too was to postpone the event of change of government in parliament. Both the two acts did not augur well for MPs who had taken an oath to participate in parliamentary work. These two moves evaded that.
Parliament is expected to cause the Executive to fully account to it, but not to interfere or prescribe how it should run its affairs. The Lesotho constitution establishes a very strong executive in relation to parliament. This can be traced back to the independence constitution; signifying that change in Lesotho is very slow. The 1993 constitution has been amended only five times. It could be a step in the right direction if parliament finally had its committees to consider VIP appointments, treaties which government wants to enter into. This would be a good addition to the teeth a parliament is supposed to have as an oversight institution of modern times.
The introduction here has it that the attitude of all parliamentary functionaries is of critical importance for the success of parliamentary democracy. Lessons can be obtained from elsewhere that some successful democracies rely on the experience of their key actors. India, as another example, values and uses its former MPs, retired parliamentary staff, seconded senior civil servants and has a career structure which ensures retention of its staff.
The Speaker there had the support of an Honorary Advisor, a former MP with a continuous service of 30 yrs in the elected house and had been a Minister, Chairperson of various committees and had also been in the opposition. This also signifies the importance of the concept of advisor: Even the most outgoing managers deserve to be continuously advised because even the world class managers occasionally do mismanage: e g appointing a minister and removing him within a few days is a classic example. Lesotho with its many parliamentary woes could be deserving such improvisation. It has not to be confined to the Executive. It could be a device to safeguard against setting of bad precedents.
The staff complement adds to the effectiveness of organizations. There has to exist mechanisms to develop and retain experienced staff which can mentor newcomers for the maintenance of standards. India could be another simple example to study: A Joint-Recruitment Cell comprising of senior staff exists, it even tests potential employees and recommends to the Speaker and Chairman of the Rajyh Sabha. The impending Lesotho Parliamentary Service will most likely deserve such an advice. A Committee Clerk may either move to greener pastures if one happens to be stuck at the top notch of the grade. There has to be a provision for such to proceed to the next notch of the higher grade, but retaining the Committee Clerk post. That helps build careers and maintain a competent team as MPs change during elections.
Lastly, there is some inaudible outcry around Maseru, opposed to government paying off outstanding loans of former MPs. One wonders what those would say if Lesotho had opted to do as other democracies do: exempting MPs from P.A.Y.E or subsidising them on that; providing medical facilities; providing for family monthly pension for spouses for years after the death of an MP? In some, an MP takes a loan and opts to buy a car directly from Japan for shipment at state expense to the state warehouse. These parliaments do with a purpose to entice the right calibre of future MPs. Lesotho could be very far from that stage, until all including the nation have a better understanding of parliament in a democracy.
About the author: Former Deputy Principal Secretary, Ministry of Law, Constitutional and Parliamentary Affairs (BCP Government); Former Clerk of Senate (2002-2010); Former member of the Assoc Of Secretaries General of Parliaments of the Inter-Parliamentary Union; and of Society of Clerks-At-The-Table of the Commonwealth Parliaments; and of SADC Parliamentary Forum; MP in the 8th Parliament.