MASERU – A heated exchange erupted in Lesotho’s National Assembly on Friday morning after Democratic Congress (DC) MP Hon. Thuso Makhalanyane challenged Speaker Tlohang Sekhamaneover a catering contract awarded to a company owned by a sitting cabinet minister.
Makhalanyane questioned why Lecholi, a company linked to Minister Lejone Mpotjoane, had been contracted by Parliament to provide food and alcohol to MPs, arguing that the arrangement raised serious conflict-of-interest concerns.
Speaker says no legal prohibition
In response, Sekhamane told the House that he did not know how Lecholi had been appointed to supply catering services.
However, his response took a more controversial turn when he stated that, to his knowledge, there was nothing in Lesotho’s laws that prevented MPs or cabinet ministers from doing business with the state.
His remarks immediately sharpened the political and legal significance of the issue, raising questions about whether Lesotho’s governance framework adequately protects public institutions from conflicts between private financial interests and public duty.
Constitution warns against government contract interests
Lesotho’s Constitution does address the issue of public officials holding interests in government contracts.
Section 59 includes provisions aimed at preventing conflicts of interest involving MPs, particularly where personal financial interests intersect with state contracts.
In addition, the Prevention of Corruption and Economic Offences Act makes it a criminal offence for a public official to participate in decisions where they have a direct or indirect personal interest without proper disclosure.
The law is designed to prevent public officials from benefiting from state contracts in ways that compromise their independence or influence.
Political and ethical questions deepen
The controversy raises broader ethical questions about the separation between public office and private business interests in Lesotho.
Even where no explicit law prohibits ministers from owning companies that contract with the state, governance standards typically require transparency, disclosure, and recusal from any involvement in procurement processes.
Failure to maintain such separation risks undermining public trust in government institutions.
The fact that the contract in question involves Parliament itself – the country’s supreme legislative body – has further intensified scrutiny.
