Mothae v Returning Officer Mosalemane (CIV/APN/0312/2022) [2022] LSHC 147 (28 September 2022)

Mothae v Returning Officer Mosalemane (CIV/APN/0312/2022) [2022] LSHC 147 (28 September 2022)

The High Court cannot stay execution of its own judgment through an interdict pending appeal; the proper procedure is to apply for stay to the judge whose decision is appealed from. Rejection of a candidate's nomination is not a ground for declaring elections failed under the National Assembly Electoral Act, 2011. The Act does not provide for substitution of candidates after rejection. The application is misconceived and without merit.

Citation
[2022] LSHC 147
Parties
1st Applicant: Chepane Mothae; 2nd Applicant: Democratic Congress; 1st Respondent: Returning Officer Mosalemane Constituency; 2nd Respondent: Director of Elections; 3rd Respondent: The Independent Electoral Commission; 4th Respondent: Lesotho Congress for Democracy; 5th Respondent: Mokopotsa Lethole; 6th Respondent: Mphatlalatsane (Hope); 7th Respondent: Mokoto Nthofela; 8th Respondent: Basotho Patriotic Party; 9th Respondent: Mokotso Francis Mokonyane; 10th Respondent: Socialist Revolutionaries Party; 11th Respondent: Mokupo Khotso; 12th Respondent: Basotholand Total Liberation Congress; 13th Respondent: Nkhahle Esaia Lefu; 14th Respondent: Reformed Congress of Lesotho; 15th Respondent: Nkuta Lucy Masekhobe; 16th Respondent: Lesotho Economic Freedom Fighters; 17th Respondent: Pali Motsamai; 18th Respondent: Basotho Action Party; 19th Respondent: Phapano Tankiso; 20th Respondent: Basutoland Congress Party; 21st Respondent: Phoofoo Nkoe; 22nd Respondent: Bahlabani Ba Tokoloho Movement; 23rd Respondent: Qoati Julius Tlali; 24th Respondent: Basotho National Party; 25th Respondent: Rampeta Louis Makara; 26th Respondent: Kopanang Basotho; 27th Respondent: Ramphalile Tlokotsi; 28th Respondent: Alliance of Democrats; 29th Respondent: Rapapa Paul Ntoi; 30th Respondent: All Basotho Convention; 31st Respondent: Rapapa Samuel Tsoinyane; 32nd Respondent: Movement for Economic Change; 33rd Respondent: Setoi Mpho; 34th Respondent: Alliance for Free Movement; 35th Respondent: Seutloali Lisebo; 36th Respondent: Popular Front for Democracy; 37th Respondent: Taemane Dingaane
Court
High Court
Jurisdiction
Lesotho
Judgment Date
28 September 2022
Case Number
CIV/APN/0312/2022
Procedural Posture
Constitutional and Electoral Petition / Judgment on Application for Interdict and Related Reliefs
Outcome
Application dismissed with costs
Legal Topics
Stay of Execution, Nomination Objection, Failed Elections, Jurisdiction, Interdicts
Source Language
English
Constitutional Law Electoral Law Civil Procedure Stay of Execution Nomination Objection Failed Elections Jurisdiction Interdicts

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 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Chepane Mothae

1st Applicant

Democratic Congress

2nd Applicant

Returning Officer Mosalemane Constituency

1st Respondent

Director of Elections

2nd Respondent

The Independent Electoral Commission

3rd Respondent

Lesotho Congress for Democracy

4th Respondent

Mokopotsa Lethole

5th Respondent

Mphatlalatsane (Hope)

6th Respondent

Mokoto Nthofela

7th Respondent

Basotho Patriotic Party

8th Respondent

Mokotso Francis Mokonyane

9th Respondent

Socialist Revolutionaries Party

10th Respondent

Mokupo Khotso

11th Respondent

Basotholand Total Liberation Congress

12th Respondent

Nkhahle Esaia Lefu

13th Respondent

Reformed Congress of Lesotho

14th Respondent

Nkuta Lucy Masekhobe

15th Respondent

Lesotho Economic Freedom Fighters

16th Respondent

Pali Motsamai

17th Respondent

Basotho Action Party

18th Respondent

Phapano Tankiso

19th Respondent

Basutoland Congress Party

20th Respondent

Phoofoo Nkoe

21st Respondent

Bahlabani Ba Tokoloho Movement

22nd Respondent

Qoati Julius Tlali

23rd Respondent

Basotho National Party

24th Respondent

Rampeta Louis Makara

25th Respondent

Kopanang Basotho

26th Respondent

Ramphalile Tlokotsi

27th Respondent

Alliance of Democrats

28th Respondent

Rapapa Paul Ntoi

29th Respondent

All Basotho Convention

30th Respondent

Rapapa Samuel Tsoinyane

31st Respondent

Movement for Economic Change

32nd Respondent

Setoi Mpho

33rd Respondent

Alliance for Free Movement

34th Respondent

Seutloali Lisebo

35th Respondent

Popular Front for Democracy

36th Respondent

Taemane Dingaane

37th Respondent

Procedural Posture

Constitutional and Electoral Petition / Judgment on Application for Interdict and Related Reliefs

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the High Court can stay execution of its own judgment pending appeal through an interdict
  2. 2 Whether rejection of a candidate's nomination justifies declaration of failed elections under the National Assembly Electoral Act, 2011
  3. 3 Whether the applicants are entitled to present a new candidate after rejection of nomination

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court cannot stay execution of its own judgment through an interdict pending appeal; the proper procedure is to apply for stay to the judge whose decision is appealed from. Rejection of a candidate's nomination is not a ground for declaring elections failed under the National Assembly Electoral Act, 2011. The Act does not provide for substitution of candidates after rejection. The application is misconceived and without merit.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed with costs

Orders

  • The application is dismissed with costs.