1

CIV/APN/94/00

IN THE
HIGH COURT OF LESOTHO

In the
Application of:

LESOTHO
ASSOCIATION OF JEHOVA'S WITNESSES 1st Applicant

MOLEFI
MOSESI 2nd Applicant

MAITATELENG
LEKOENEHA 3rd Applicant

NTEBALENG
NQHOAKI 4th Applicant

THE
LESOTHO EVANGELICAL CHURCH 1st Respondent

UNITED
PRIMARY SCHOOL 2nd Respondent

THE ROMAN
CATHOLIC CHURCH 3rd Respondent

THE MOST
HOLY REDEEMER PRIMARY SCHOOL 4th Respondent

THE
MINISTRY OF EDUCATION 5th Respondent

THE
ATTORNEY GENERAL 6th Respondent

JUDGMENT

Delivered
by the Hon Mr Justice ML. Lehohla on the 27th day of April 2000

Court
assembled this morning after adjourning from chambers when it dawned
on it that to day is a return date in respect of an order for
contempt sought by applicants in respect of non-compliance by
respondents 3 i.e. Roman Catholic Church and

4 The Most
Holy Redeemer

2

Primary
School on whose behalf Bishop Bitsoane and Mrs Mathabang Moorosi
respectively were served with the order requiring them to show cause
why they shouldn't be committed for contempt because of their
non-compliance with the order demanding reinstatement of the child
Khotsofalang Nqhoaki to the school; respondent 4.

In Court
Miss Tau informed me that she was in touch with Mr Ntlhoki for
respondents 3 and 4 and that he sought indulgence of 30 minutes to
finish some court business with another judge. Thus very properly
Miss Tau didn't want to take judgment behind a colleague's back.

Shortly
afterwards Miss Tau came into Chambers with Mr Phafane who stated
that he was appearing at the request of Mr Ntlhoki and was seeking,
according to his instructions, an indulgence to be allowed time to
file answering affidavits and, in due course, have the matter argued
why there shouldn't be final order for committal for contempt.

It seemed
clear to me that Mr Phafane was in a rather invidious and
embarrassing position because :

3

1. The
   interests of the child whom court felt should be and should have
   been met by letting him be re-instated were ignored along with the
   Court Order.

   
   

2. Judgments
   of the High Court and Court of Appeal denouncing the kind of
   behaviour manifested against 1st applicant in other matters were
   totally disregarded yet such judgments are now the undoubted law.

   
   

3. The
   two respondents by not being in attendance have compounded their
   contempt by frustrating the Court's ability to deal with them
   immediately should it so desire.

   
   

However
because of sheer possibility that the fault lay with Mr Ntlhoki the
Court was reluctantly inclined to grant indulgence on two strict
conditions :

1. That
   the child be immediately readmitted to the school in question.

   
   

2. That
   should there be resistance then the Deputy Sheriff should take such
   resistors into custody pending the hearing for proper sentence by
   this Court for such resistance.

   
   

Finally
the return date during which the application for contempt should have
4 been finally heard today is extended to 5th May, 2000.

JUDGE

27TH
April, 200

For
Applicants : Miss Tau

For
Respondents : Mr Ntlhoki