Basotho Patriotic Party & 3 Others V Lejone Puseletso & 6 others (C of A (CIV) No 13/2024) [2024] LSCA 17 (1 November 2024)

Basotho Patriotic Party & 3 Others V Lejone Puseletso & 6 others (C of A (CIV) No 13/2024) [2024] LSCA 17 (1 November 2024)

The applicants failed to demonstrate any patent error or gross injustice in the original judgment. The Court's decision to invalidate the 9th Amendment prospectively was a proper exercise of judicial discretion. The 11th Amendment Bill was not before the Court and is not justiciable. The judiciary's role in reviewing legislation for constitutional compliance does not usurp Parliament's legislative function. The basic structure doctrine is now established law in Lesotho. The application is dismissed with costs.

Citation
[2024] LSCA 17
Parties
Appellant: Basotho Patriotic Party; Appellant: Democratic Congress; Appellant: Basotho National Party; Appellant: Popular Front for Democracy; Respondent: Lejone Puseletso; Respondent: Speaker of the National Assembly; Respondent: Clerk of the National Assembly; Respondent: The Prime Minister; Respondent: Minister of Law and Constitutional Affairs; Respondent: Attorney General; Respondent: Independent Electoral Commission
Court
Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction
Lesotho
Judgment Date
1 November 2024
Case Number
C of A (CIV) No 13/2024
Procedural Posture
Constitutional Review / Appeal / Application for Review of Court of Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Application for review dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
Basic Structure Doctrine, Constitutional Amendment, Objective Invalidity, Suspension of Invalidity, Separation of Powers, Judicial Review
Source Language
English
Constitutional Law Basic Structure Doctrine Constitutional Amendment Objective Invalidity Suspension of Invalidity Separation of Powers Judicial Review

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 4 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Basotho Patriotic Party

Appellant

Democratic Congress

Appellant

Basotho National Party

Appellant

Popular Front for Democracy

Appellant

Lejone Puseletso

Respondent

Speaker of the National Assembly

Respondent

Clerk of the National Assembly

Respondent

The Prime Minister

Respondent

Minister of Law and Constitutional Affairs

Respondent

Attorney General

Respondent

Independent Electoral Commission

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Constitutional Review / Appeal / Application for Review of Court of Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Court of Appeal erred in not suspending the invalidity of the 9th Amendment to allow Parliament to enact compliant legislation
  2. 2 Whether the Court of Appeal erred by reviving pre-amendment constitutional provisions
  3. 3 Whether the Court usurped Parliament's legislative function

Ratio Decidendi

The applicants failed to demonstrate any patent error or gross injustice in the original judgment. The Court's decision to invalidate the 9th Amendment prospectively was a proper exercise of judicial discretion. The 11th Amendment Bill was not before the Court and is not justiciable. The judiciary's role in reviewing legislation for constitutional compliance does not usurp Parliament's legislative function. The basic structure doctrine is now established law in Lesotho. The application is dismissed with costs.

Court Disposition

Application for review dismissed with costs

Orders

  • The application for review is dismissed.
  • Applicants shall bear the costs of the application, including costs of two counsel for the first respondent and one counsel for the fifth respondent.