Jubie Matlou
Lesotho is the focus of intense diplomatic activity as foreign powers search for ways of kickstarting the stalled democratic process in the mountainous kingdom, to beat the expiry of an 18-month deadline for the holding of fresh elections.
The agreement was brokered in late 1998 under the auspices of the Southern African Development Community (SADC), ending months of turmoil and instability after opposition parties rejected the result of the May 1998 general election.
Scandinavian diplomats this week joined forces with SADC peace brokers to smooth out obstacles to ensuring that elections take place by May 16.
The May 16 2000 cut-off date was agreed upon by the multi-party Interim Political Authority (IPA) for the commencement of a new political dispensation for the country.
But political tensions continue to bedevil the process. In what has emerged as the key issue in the current climate, opposition parties accused the ruling Lesotho Congress of Democrats (LCD) of shifting the goalposts by failing to enact electoral legislation agreed upon within the structures of the IPA. Instead, the LCD has pushed legislation, which widely diverges from that agreed in the IPA, through the lower house of Parliament.
Vincent Malebo, leader of the Marematlou Freedom Party and chair of the IPA, said: ” All parties in the IPA had agreed, to a great extent, on the process towards fresh elections, as well as the electoral system to be followed – a mixed- proportional ratio model.”
The mixed-member Parliament model allows for a hybrid of proportional and constituency representation in Parliament.
Malebo said when a Bill was introduced in Parliament to this effect, legislating for this new electoral system, the IPA was stunned by the LCD when it rejected the consensual electoral model. The LCD then unilaterally replaced it with a different model, that of one person, one vote. This would mean a return to a winner-takes-all system which would render opposition parties toothless.
The LCD-dominated Parliament went on to pass the Bill, with amendments, but without the support of the IPA. “It appears the LCD is destined to steamroll its way and entrench its position in the new dispensation,” said Malebo.
However, the Senate saved the day for the IPA, rejecting the LCD-sponsored Bill, and insisting on the model approved by the IPA. This stalemate leaves the country with only one option – for Parliament to go into recess, and for a new session to be called – unless the Senate can be persuaded to withdraw its objections.
This, in effect, would give the LCD leeway to push forward its version of the Electoral Order Bill.
Lesotho came to the boil in 1998 after charges of election-rigging were levelled against the ruling LCD. The situation deteriorated to the extent that senior army officers were sacked in a mutiny orchestrated by their subordinates, leading to a total breakdown of administration in the territory and the military intervention of South African (and, later, Botswanan) troops under the SADC banner.
Candy Ramainoana, journalist and co- convener of IPA report-back meetings, told the Mail & Guardian: “The people of Lesotho are getting impatient with the continued impasse over the future of the country.” Ramainoana said the last opposition mass meeting, held last Sunday, resolved to call on the IPA to use its legislative mandate to dissolve Parliament and the current government and replace it with an all-inclusive government of national unity.
The LCD’s seeming intransigence is believed by opposition politicians and political pundits to be connected to other developments which have entrenched the party’s hold on political power. The recent signing of a defence pact with South Africa is a case in point – giving the government of the day in Lesotho the right to call on South African troops to quell domestic unrest.
Sam Mkhwanazi, South African Ministry of Defence representative, said the security pact covers three areas. Firstly, it seeks to legalise the presence of SADC troops in Lesotho. This section was also signed by the SADC troika of South Africa, Botswana and Zimbabwe. The second agreement -called Operation Maluti – is about the training of the Lesotho army with the aim of depoliticising it.
Finally, the pact includes a memorandum of understanding that seeks to facilitate co-operation between the South African and Lesotho defence forces in the areas of sharing intelligence, health and medical services, as well as border control and crime prevention.
An amazed Malebo questioned the need for, and relevance of, a defence pact with South Africa. “Why should Lesotho need a security pact? There are no external threats against LesothoE… A security pact against who? I could only imagine that such a pact is meant to suppress internal political dissent.”