Electricity Tariff Increase Dispute Sparks Controversy and Legal ActionIn a recent development that has stirred controversy and legal action, the Lesotho Electricity and Water Authority (LEWA) finds itself embroiled in a dispute over proposed electricity tariff increases. The dispute, which has garnered widespread attention and raised concerns about transparency and procedural fairness, underscores the complexities of regulatory processes and the need for robust mechanisms to ensure accountability and protect consumer interests.
The dispute originated from an application submitted by the Lesotho Electricity Company (LEC), seeking significant tariff increases across all customer categories for the financial years 2023/2024, 2024/2025, and 2025/2026. The application, which was received by the LEA without the most recent audited financial statements for the fiscal year ending 31st March 2023, has been met with skepticism and criticism from stakeholders, who question the justification behind the proposed increases.One of the key issues raised by stakeholders is the lack of transparency in the tariff-setting process.
The absence of the most recent audited financial statements has raised doubts about the accuracy and reliability of the information used to justify the tariff increases. Stakeholders, led by the Advocates for the Supremacy of the Constitution (Section 2), have argued that the lack of transparency undermines the trust of consumers and other stakeholders in the regulatory process.The controversy reached a boiling point when the LEWA, despite objections and concerns raised by stakeholders, proceeded to endorse the implementation of the new electricity tariffs on 20th March 2024.
This move has been met with widespread criticism and has prompted legal action from Section 2 and other stakeholders, who have challenged the decision in court.In his founding affidavit, Kananelo Boloetse, the President of Section 2, highlighted the importance of the case in safeguarding the rights of vulnerable persons and ensuring procedural fairness. Boloetse, along with other stakeholders, including consumer Bokang Sekopa, argued that the tariff increase would have a detrimental impact on consumers, particularly those with limited income, and called for a fair and transparent adjudication process.The case has significant implications for the electricity sector in Lesotho and has sparked a broader debate about the role of regulatory bodies in ensuring transparency and accountability.
It has also highlighted the need for greater public participation in regulatory processes to ensure that the interests of consumers are adequately represented. As the legal proceedings continue, stakeholders are hopeful for a fair and just resolution that considers the interests of all parties involved. The case serves as a reminder of the importance of transparency, accountability, and consumer protection in regulatory processes, and underscores the need for regulatory bodies to act in the best interests of the public.The dispute over the proposed electricity tariff increases in Lesotho has sparked controversy and legal action, highlighting the complexities of regulatory processes and the need for transparency and accountability in decision-making.
Stakeholders, led by the Advocates for the Supremacy of the Constitution (ASC), have raised concerns about the lack of transparency in the tariff-setting process and the potential impact on consumers, particularly those with limited income.The dispute originated from an application submitted by the Lesotho Electricity Company (LEC) to the Lesotho Electricity and Water Authority (LEWA), seeking significant tariff increases across all customer categories for the financial years 2023/2024, 2024/2015, and 2015/2026. However, the application was submitted without the most recent audited financial statements for the fiscal year ending 31st March 2023, raising questions about the justification behind the proposed increases.Stakeholders, including ASC and consumer Bokang Sekopa, have challenged the decision to approve the tariff increases, citing concerns about procedural fairness and the lack of transparency in the process. The case has been brought before the Commercial Division of the High Court, which specializes in handling commercial disputes.In his founding affidavit, Kananelo Boloetse, the President of Section 2, emphasized the importance of the case in safeguarding the rights of vulnerable persons and ensuring procedural fairness. Boloetse argued that the tariff increases would have a detrimental impact on consumers, particularly those with limited income, and called for a fair and transparent adjudication process.
