. . . Over a litany of “unmet” promises
. . . Insist project has destroyed their livelihoods
—Escalate their grievances to the IRM
Mohloai Mpesi
THE host communities of the mammoth Polihali Dam project have demanded that the construction of the more than M50 billion project be halted.
They complain the project has destroyed their livelihoods and they have had to endure many “broken promises”.
Consequently, they have accused one of the project funders, the African Development Bank (AfDB), of causing environmental and social harm. The communities have hence escalated their grievances to the Independent Recourse Mechanism (IRM) demanding, among other things, fair compensation for their losses. They insist the project must be halted until their grievances are addressed.
The IRM is the AfDB’s accountability and redress mechanism meant to provide recourse for individuals, workers and communities who may be negatively impacted by projects financed by the bank.
In a letter to IRM through their lawyer, about 1600 community members accuse the AfDB of snubbing their grievances.
These include incomplete feasibility studies, inadequate compensation, unfavourable relocation sites, and that the project’s design is insensitive to unique gender needs, among others.
The Polihali communities want the Lesotho Highlands Water Project (LHWP) Phase II suspended, arguing that it has already caused significant disruption is poised to inflict even greater harm.
AfDB funds the LHWP Phase II project with a loan of US$86.72 million (about M1.5 billion), approved on 5 October 2021.
The LHWP II is a large-scale binational infrastructure project shared by Lesotho and South Africa, designed to increase water transfer from Lesotho to Gauteng, South Africa.
In the main, the project includes the building of the Polihali Dam, the Polihali-Katse Transfer Tunnel, the Polihali North-East Access Road, and the upgrading of an existing gravel road serving as the initial access route to the Polihali area, among other related works.
The communities wrote to IRM on 11 September 2025, after their legal advisors, Seinoli Legal Centre, submitted complaints to AfDB in November 2024 but did not yield anything.
Seinoli made a summary statement during their meeting with the Bank regarding community concerns related to LHWP II, highlighting grievances such as lack of transparency on resettlement and compensation.
The communities also wanted the immediate halting of blasting activities until affected communities are relocated or compensated.
Through Seinoli Legal Centre, the communities complained in their letter that the project has led to “forced displacements”.
The aggrieved communities also state that the project had impacted on their livelihoods because of inadequate “compensation of communal and individual land as well as (lack of) prompt compensation of household assets, environmental harm, cultural disinheritance, gender impact due to lack of gender and safeguarding policies, among other issues”.
Lack of transparency
The communities lament that they have unsuccessfully made several attempts to obtain critical information related to their relocation and compensation to inform sound decisions.
Preliminary construction works have already commenced without affected communities receiving all the required information on the project’s environmental and social impact, they say.
“Overall, we are supportive of the Phase II of the project and its intended objectives. However, despite several attempts to ask for key information, we are disappointed that we still do not have adequate information concerning the implementation of the project and how it affects us.
“We are therefore not able to make informed decisions about compensation and relocation and are unable to participate fully in decisions that affect our lives, land, and environment.”
The communities say they are already experiencing harm associated with advance infrastructure works and are concerned that if left unresolved, the damages will increase and become irreversible as the project continues.”
“For example, a pre-blasting assessment, including photographic documentation of property conditions, should have been conducted to establish a baseline. However, no such assessment took place in Ha-Konki, leaving affected households without evidence to support claims of damage caused to property by blasting.
“To this day, we still do not have adequate information about the availability of basic services or resources in that area to determine whether it will be able to support our livelihoods and families.”
Compensation
The communities say they remain clueless about the way compensation rates were calculated.
“Most of us are not aware of the details of compensation. We mostly get a document that says how much LHDA is going to pay, but we don’t know what they are paying for. We don’t know how much land has been taken by the project and what remains.
It makes it difficult for them to determine if the compensation is adequate, they argue, adding: “And if we don’t sign or if we ask too many questions, we risk not being compensated at all.”
The letter reveals that in Phohla-Masaleng and Phohla-Majakaneng, residents have not been consulted on compensation rates.
“We were not consulted on compensation rates and are yet to receive copies of our files. Similarly, in Tsekong, Konki, and Litsotsong, we were not consulted on compensation rates or informed about the value of our assets; we were compensated without the opportunity to verify our assets inventory registration files.”
Forced relocation
They also accuse LHDA of not giving them sufficient room to choose where they want to be relocated to.
“When it comes to relocation, the only thing we know is that we are meant to be relocated. But (as to) when, to where, how — all that is not clear. We are not consulted about where we would like to be relocated. Most of us are unhappy with where we have or are being relocated to, but we have little choice in the matter.
“We are given specific areas chosen by LHDA as areas for our relocation and we have to choose from that list, whether we like the areas or not. We are not given a choice as the relocating community to choose an area which we prefer for relocation.”
The letter continues: “In Masakong and Ha-Tlakola communities, for example, we have tried to raise our voices and request to be relocated close by — near our own agricultural land, land that has belonged to us for generations.
“A meeting was held with LHDA on 5 March 2025 to discuss these issues. We believed this would be fair, especially after we saw some of that land being turned into residential plots for others. However, LHDA refused.
“When we went to the Seate Community Council to try and formalise the land use, we were told that the Minister had rejected our application. We were never consulted. We were never given a clear explanation.
“It feels as if our needs simply do not matter. For us, this is not just a matter of relocating houses. It is about losing livelihoods, identity, and security. In Ha-Phohla, during the initial site selection process in 2024, we were led to believe that we could choose from different relocation areas that LHDA had proposed.
“So, a majority of us chose Ha-Ramoruti (Sekhutloaneng) only for LHDA’s consultant Lima-Thaha to return and inform us that Ha-Ramoruti (Sekhutloaneng) would no longer be developed due to high infrastructure costs and lack of access roads.”
Community members also allege that some of the areas they are supposed to relocate to lack water and proper sanitation.
“Those of us in Tsekong were informed that we will be relocated to Lilimala and Makalong. In both areas, water is scarce.”
Gender-based harms
They also allege that the project’s design and implementation is bereft of gender-responsive policies, strategies, and legal safeguards.
“The lack of such frameworks has not only enabled discrimination, but it has actively facilitated gender-based violence, exclusion, and long-term harm. As women and girls, we are not simply left behind; we are being systematically put in harm’s way.”
Women and girls, the letters states, were not represented nor consulted as a distinct group during community consultations, and their unique experiences, needs, and contributions are routinely overlooked in project design and decision-making processes.
“This lack of representation denies us a voice in decisions that fundamentally shape our lives and futures.”
Pregnant women and nursing mothers are forced to evacuate their homes for their own safety.
“As pregnant women and nursing mothers, we have to constantly evacuate our homes and move far away to avoid being injured by falling debris or the tremors caused by the explosions from blasting — which happens mostly at night and without warning. All of this could have been prevented had LHDA resettled us before initiating its quarry mining activities within our community.”
Detention and torture
The letter also explained how the communities have been subjected to inhumane torture, intimidation, and violent arrests during peaceful protests.
“In multiple project-affected communities, particularly Masakong and Ha-Seshote, we have been subjected to intimidation, violent arrests, and even torture at the hands of law enforcement agents, including police officers and soldiers.
“These acts of repression have occurred during peaceful protests, where we sought only to express our grievances and demand accountability from LHDA. We have raised issues ranging from lack of transparency to unfulfilled promises and discrimination yet, instead of receiving engagement or remedy, we have been met with brute force and fear.
“In Tsekong, Malubalube, Tloha-re-buoe, Makhoaba, and Sekokong, our peaceful public demonstrations have been dismissed and, in some instances, we have been threatened, intimidated, or physically harmed for speaking out.”
LHDA response
In response, LHDA released a media statement this week dismissing these allegations, stating that the letter does not reflect the realities of how the project is being implemented.
“The LHWP is managed in accordance with the highest international standards, as well as national legislation, and is subject to rigorous oversight by its governance structures, including the two governments of Lesotho and South Africa through the LHWC, financiers, regulators, and independent auditors and experts.
“On resettlement and compensation, no household is relocated without comprehensive consultation, and affected families participate in asset registration and entitlement confirmation processes, ensuring they are fully aware of the form and value of compensation they are entitled to.
“Host communities are also engaged to prepare them for welcoming resettled households. To date, over 93% of private asset compensation has been completed, with more than M154 million paid to affected households under Phase II.
“Remaining cases are largely delayed due to missing documents, absentee beneficiaries, or family disputes, and LHDA continues to provide support to finalise these payments.
“Compensation for communal assets has also been agreed upon and will be implemented starting in 2026, well before reservoir filling, ensuring communities do not lose access without replacement measures in place.”
