Constitutional Interpretation

Lephoto v The Directorate of Corruption and Economic Offences (Const. No. 11/2017) [2022]LSHC 09 (17 March 2022);

Share
Search Summary: 

                                                       SUMMARY

CONSTITUTIONAL LAW: Application to have section 98(4) of the Money Laundering and Proceeds of Crime Act no.40 of 2008 declared unconstitutional for violating section 12 of the Constitution, in that it permits the concurrent running of criminal and civil proceedings in respect of the same property seized in terms of it- she had argued that, given this scenario, it forces her to disclose her defence in civil proceedings thereby  forcing her to waive her right to self-incrimination with the consequence that her pending criminal trial is prejudiced- Held, this section does not force an applicant faced with forfeiture application to incriminate herself, what it rather does is to leave her with the choice between leaving forfeiture application go unchallenged and substantively responding to it, held that for this reason, this section is constitutional.

-The applicant had further sought to have a three-year delay to charge her with criminal offences following her suspension from work, violated her right to be tried within a reasonable time in terms of section 12 of the Constitution, Held, pre-charge delay in preferring charges not protected by the right to speedy trial a provided under section 12 of the Constitution, the reckoning of time within which a person must be tried starts after charges have been read  not before.

             

 

 

 

IN THE HIGH COURT OF LESOTHO

 

HELD AT MASERU                       Constitutional Case No. 11/2017

 

In the matter between:

 

`MAHELENA LEPHOTO                                           APPLICANT

 

AND

 

THE DIRECTORATE ON CORRUPTION

AND ECONOMIC OFFENCES                         1ST RESPONDENT

THE MINISTER OF LAW AND

Phaila V Director of Public Prosecutions (C of A (CIV) 23/2021) [2021] LSCA 34 (12 November 2021);

Share
Search Summary: 

SUMMARY

By creating statutory offences and the Directorate on Corruption and Economic Offences, the Prevention of Corruption and Economic Offences Act of 1999 does not give the Directorate the exclusive authority to investigate and prosecute economic offences under the Act. The constitutional mandates of the Police to investigate and of the National Director of Public Prosecutions to prosecute all criminal offences in Lesotho remain untouched.

                                                  

 

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF LESOTHO

                                                   C OF A (CIV) 23/2021

                                                                                                                                                        CC/NO 24/2018

In the matter between-

 

Hlasa v Patsi (CIV/A/32/2013) [2014] LSHC 62 (11 May 2014);

Share

 

CIV/A/32/2013

 

 

IN THE HIGH COURT OF LESOTHO

 

 

In the Matter Between:-

 

 

KOSE HLASA                                                                  Appellant

 

         

And

 

 

MORENA MOTJOTJO PATSI                                         Respondent

            

 

                                          

Summary