MASERU
A Notice of Motion filed by Petroleum Fund Chief Executive Officer, Mr. Thato Mohasoa caused a stir that involved the Minister of Finance and Development Planning- Dr. Rets’elisitsoe Matlanyane and board of directors of Petroleum Fund.
In the founding affidavit that was written on 6 March 2024, Mohasoa gave a brief account of his background where he stated that he received his letter of employment on 26 April 2019 which was meant to come into effect on 1 May 2019. The terms of the letter stipulated that the offer was made in compliance with Section 13(1) of the Lesotho Petroleum Regulations, 2009. Apart from the duration (5years) of the contract, the letter included details of his direct cash renumeration, indirect renumeration (fringe benefits) and an indication to accept or decline the offer. The contract was dated to expire on 30 April 2024.
Mohasoa went on to declare that on 30 January 2024, he received formal correspondence communicating the Board’s intention to recommend renewal of his appointment to the Minister of Finance and Development Planning to which he duly responded that he accepts this renewal of contract. As communicated, on 31 January 2024, the chairperson of the Board put down in writing their decision as the Board including their motivating factors and justifications thereof.
The decision was reached in accordance with Section 13 of the Lesotho Petroleum Fund Regulations, 2021 read together with clause 2.4 of the Fixed Contract entered between the Chief Executive Officer and the Fund. “According to Section 13(2) of the Regulations, the renewal of the CEO’s contract is subject to a good performance. One of the key expectations in the appointment of the current CEO was an assurance that he would provide the necessary transformative leadership to the organization and assist in graduating it from an otherwise moribund institution, to the one that would be impactful on achieving its core mandate of ensuring that there is adequate security of supply of petroleum product in the country.
In all fair assessment, the CEO achieved that feat and has provided a leadership that has transformed the Petroleum Fund into one of the key strategic State-Owned Enterprises, whose corporate presence and institutional impact is felt, both locally and internationally…” The Petroleum Fund board chairperson went on to give detailed explanations on how the CEO achieved these as well as the commendable goals he has attained thus the board felt he was worthy of another run.
On 15 February 2024 addendum to the fixed contract that was signed during the month of July 2019 which was amended such that the contract is valid until 20 April 2024. It was a let-down on 16 February 2024, when the Minister of Finance penned down a letter declaring denial of the renewal of contract of the CEO and further instructing that the Board advertise the said position.
Section 4.4 of the affidavit stated the following:
“I wish to take the court into my confidence and assert that the response is glaringly framed in the tersest of terms to the effect that the renewal of my appointment is not approved without more. This is quite surprising when being juxtaposed against the motivation made by the Board in motivation of renewal of my contract. I have been advised and believe the same to be true that this is a grave administrative malady on the part of the Minister of Finance and Development Planning for the following reasons:
a. No reasons have been provided for the rejection of my proposed engagement and renewed contract.
b. Regulation 13 is framed in the preemptory terms to the effect that the Minister ‘shall’ on the advice of the Board, appoint Chief Executive Officer (CEO)…
c. The Minister of Finance and Development Planning bore no discretion to reject the recommendation and to further direct re-advertisement without a firm legal basis and there is such basis justifying the refusal to yield to the recommendation made by the Board of Petroleum Fund in the context of the case on the radar.”
The nature of the application was as thus, wants the Minister of Finance (1st Respondent) to be instructed to provide the court with the record of proceedings, deliberations and or resolutions that prompted her to negate the recommendation of the Board of Petroleum Fund (3rd Respondent).
Upon waiting for these proceedings, Mohasoa wants the Minister of Finance, and the Petroleum Fund (2nd Respondent) to be prohibited from re-advertising the position of Chief Executive Officer of Petroleum Fund. He also wants The Board of Petroleum Fund to be restricted from initiating any meetings which are meant to deliberate on matters involving the re-advertisement of Petroleum Fund’s Chief Executive Officer position which was set to take place on 19 March 2024.
Mohasoa exercised his prima facie right, citing the prejudice that has been bestowed upon him. He further alluded that that the decision made by the Minister may have been influenced by underlying political factors. The intervention of the court was sought as he believed that this decision was contemptuous. Moreover, “… Her letter of refusal does not even mention the basis of her decision…”
Mohasoa wants his full rights to continue with his duties as Chief Executive Officer during this period. According to his court papers, grounds for which the Minister declined the renewal of his contract should be regarded as ‘unlawful and or illegal’, so was dismissing the recommendation made by the Board of Petroleum Fund. Therein, he wants the court to instruct the Minister of Finance to renew the Applicant’s contract just as the Board of Petroleum Fund had recommended on 30 January 2024.
