Should SADC prevail over Lesotho?
exactly what is it that hashatsi wants? Does he want justice or does he use the justice system to deny justice? he is one of the people who were reluctant to help the Commission to know the truth because in critical questions of knowledge, he would either have no comment or plead ignorance.
If the matter is that the chair insinuated that hashatsi is pre-judged, why would it be a matter for him that all the evidence found in the RSA be annulled? Why would it matter for him that the Commission reports to the Prime Minister not SADC?
In terms of Section 8(3) of the Public Inquiries Act, the Prime Minister has the power not to disclose part of the Commission’s report if, in his or her judgement, it would not be proper for internal security, rights or any matter to disclose. Could this be what hashatsi wants?
In the multiplicity of facts and ideas, speculations and opinions, it could not be so difficult to see that even if it may not be a collective, there are those in government who stand to benefit if the whole process is flawed or at least certain aspects of evidence given does not influence the report.
On the other hand SADC is upset by the manner in which government defines the Hashatsi case, which they see as sheer delaying tactics and manipulation of processes.
The SADC as well as government of Lesotho, basically politicians at different levels, have disrespected Basotho at various stages of handling Lesotho problems and when they lock heads or horns, it would not be proper for any to see ends as determining the means.
The entire spectrum of society should be exposed to rationalisation well beyond the
threshold of the truth held by politicians. The contention here is that people have something to share and contribute to their own affairs.
In a free and open discourse Basotho should not allow politicians either at SADC level or in the Khokanyana-phiri, not even the Opposition, to conclude this matter without agreement being reached with everybody concerned.
Basotho should rise and act with resolve that nothing becomes valid unless it is for the truth and peace.
By prevailing over the Lesotho government, would SADC not be completely disabling government to carry out the recommendations of the Phumaphi Commission? In fact, would it not be a free licence for non-compliance which is not for the benefit of Basotho?
So SADC should not fall in the trap. If the whole process is delayed, then it would not only be justice delayed but justice deferred and consequentially denied.
On the other hand, the government of Lesotho should not be allowed to renege on the objective process. Government must be reminded by the people that it put the Commission of Inquiry as a deferred answer to development partners who demanded full accountability on some rights and governance issues.
If it is true that no one has shifted gears, can the government and SADC agree on strategies to fast-track the court process so that it is completed?
Prime minister Pakalitha mosisili
Justice mpathi Phumaphi