Constitutional Law

Transformation Resource Centre & 2 Others Vs Council of State & 62 others (Cons case No/08/2019) [2019] LSHC 10 (16 October 2019);

Share

CONS CASE/08/2019

IN THE HIGH COURT OF LESOTHO

(Exercising Constitutional Jurisdiction)

(HELD AT MASERU)

In the matter between

 

INDEPENDENT ELECTORAL COMMISSION       URGENT APPLICANT

 

AND

 

THE GOVERNMENT OF LESOTHO                               64TH RESPONDENT

MINISTER OF FINANCE                                                   65TH RESPONDENT

Mokhosi & 15 others V Justice Charles Hungwe & 5 others (Cons Case No/02/2019) [2019] LSHC 9 (02 May 2019);

Share

CONS CASE NO/02/2019

 

 

IN THE HIGH COURT OF LESOTHO

(HELD AT MASERU)

In the matter between

TŠELISO MOKHOSI & 15 OTHERS                        APPLICANTS

AND

JUSTICE CHARLES HUNGWE                                1ST RESPONDENT

THE PRIME MINISTER                                             2ND RESPODNENT

MINISTER OF LAW, HUMAN RIGHTS

Mokhosi and Others v Hungwe N.O. and Others (Cons Case No 02/2019) [2019] LSHC 1 (02 May 2019);

Share
Search Summary: 

Constitutional Law - declaratory order sought by Applicants — to set aside appointments of 1st Respondent and foreign Judges - applicants allerging control of JSC by Executive arm of Government - said to interfere in appointments to ensure harsh punishment for Applicants — violating principle of independence of the Judiciary — and possible outcome being violation of Applicants right to a fair hearing before an impartial Court — whether case for Applicants established and proved — costs order in Constitutional Cases — court may not depart from the accepted rules and principles unless the Applicants case is frivolous and vexatious.
 

Ramakatsa and Others v Commissioner of Police and Others (Constitutional Case No.22/2018) [2019] LSHCONST 1 (16 April 2019);

Share
Flynote: 
Search Summary: 

Application for habeas corpus and release from unlawful detention – Applicants’ relatives applying to court – Whether relatives have locus-standi – Constitution 1993, section 22(1)

Liberty – Detention – Lawfulness – Prescribed purpose – Applicants arrested and detained in police custody on charge of robbery – Period of detention extending beyond the constitutional and statutory period of 48 hours – No charge laid throughout period of detention and applicants not brought before court for remand – Warrants for further detention granted without notice to applicants or their lawyer – Whether restriction of liberty imposed for purposes other than those prescribed in the Constitution and the Criminal Procedure and Evidence Act – Constitution 1993, sections 4(1)(b), 6; Criminal Procedure and Evidence Act, 1981 sections 32, 33 and 34

Individual application – Hindrance – Access to lawyer while in detention – Legal representation when application for further detention made – Applicants’ lawyer denied access by the police – Interrogation used as reason for denying access to lawyer and family members – Whether infringement of the right to legal advice and legal representation – Constitution 1993; Judges’ Rules.

Interrogation by police – Denial of access to lawyer – Evidence collected in the process  - Whether evidence to be declared inadmissible in subsequent trial – Whether right to presumption of innocence violated – Constitution 1993, section 12(2) (a).

IN THE HIGH COURT OF LESOTHO

Held at Maseru

CONSTITUTIONAL CASE NO.22/2018

 

In the matter between:

 

‘MAABELE RAMAKATSA                                               1ST APPLICANT

NTSOAKI SENTJE                                                               2ND APPLICANT

Peta v Minister of Law, Constitutional Affairs and Human Rights (CC 11/2016) [2018] LSHC 3 (18 May 2018);

Share
Search Summary: 

Application to declare sections 104,102 and 101 of the Penal Code Act no.6 of 2010 inconsistent with the Constitution----Held, on account of the impugned sections’ overbreadth, vagueness of the concepts used, the availability of civil remedies and the overall undesirability of criminalizing defamation, they are declared inconsistent with section 14 of the Constitution---held further that the declaration of invalidity shall operate retrospectively. Applicant awarded costs of suit

 IN THE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT OF LESOTHO

                                                                                         CC 11/2016

In the matter between

 

BASILDON PETA                                                           APPLICANT

AND

THE MINISTER OF LAW, CONSTITUTIONAL           FIRST RESPONDENT

AFFAIRS AND HUMAN RIGHTS                                                     

Security Lesotho (Pty) Ltd v Moepa and Others (Constitutional Case No.12 of 2014) [2015] LSHC 11 (09 June 2015);

Share

 

 

Constitutional Case No.12 of 2014

 

IN THE HIGH COURT OF LESOTHO

(Constitutional Jurisdiction)

 

 

In the matter between:

 

SECURITY LESOTHO (PTY) LTD                           APPLICANT

 

 

and

 

LEBOHANG MOEPA                                                 1ST RESPONDENT

President of the Court of Appeal v The Prime Minister and Others (C of A (CIV) No 62/2013) [2014] LSCA 1 (04 April 2014);

Share

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

THE COURT OF APPEAL OF LESOTHO

JUDGMENT

 

 

Case No: C of A (CIV) No 62/2013

 

 

In the matter between:

 

 

THE PRESIDENT OF THE COURT OF APPEAL                                    APPELLANT

 

and