…as court orders compensation of affected families
Moorosi Tsiane
NALEDI Funeral Planners has once again found itself at the centre of a distressing court battle after the High Court ordered it to compensate two bereaved families whose loved ones’ bodies were negligently swapped, buried incorrectly and mishandled.
High Court Judge Polo Banyane described the incident as a shocking failure to treat the dead with dignity and respect.
The Naledi scandal emerged last week when the funeral company appeared before Justice Banyane in a desperate bid to have the body of the late Seabata Ramohapi, which had been wrongly buried by the Khohlooa family in Sefikeng Ha Khohlooa, exhumed and reburied by the correct family.
Advocate Relebohile Lesholu, representing Naledi, admitted before Justice Banyane last Friday that Naledi staff had recklessly swapped Mr Ramohapi’s body with that of Khotso Khohlooa. The matter came barely a week after Naledi had been in the news over a bitter ownership dispute between its shareholders.
Due to the negligence of Naledi staff, the Khohlooa family earlier this month mistakenly buried the body of Mr Ramohapi after funeral officers insisted that they take the body, despite the family raising concerns that it was not their relative.
Events took a dramatic turn a fortnight ago when the Ramohapi family was preparing to bury their loved one. Upon the arrival of the corpse at the Ramohapi home in Malealea, Mafeteng, the family realised that the body delivered was not theirs. They demanded that the driver return with the body and bring the correct one.
Instead, the family was sent from pillar to post. They were initially told the body had been mistakenly transferred to the Teyateyaneng branch. This later changed to Mokhotlong, with Naledi instructing the family to continue with funeral preparations, promising the body would be delivered the following morning. That never happened.
When moving the application last Friday, Adv Lesholu was ordered by the court to bring both families before it so that inquiries could be conducted. Members of both families appeared on Monday.
Each family was given an opportunity to explain what had transpired, with both recounting harrowing experiences and describing how Naledi staff toyed with their emotions during an already painful period.
Justice Banyane initially directed the families and Naledi to negotiate compensation.
“It appears that when the Khohlooa family was collecting its body for burial, they raised concerns with the mortuary that the body presented to them was not theirs. According to the version given before this court by Lerenyane Khohlooa, one of the sons of the deceased, he informed Naledi officers and even pointed out identification marks and pictures of his father.
“However, the matter was poorly handled because whatever he told the officers was rejected. Instead of checking the shelves to confirm the identity of the body, Naledi explored other methods of verification, ignoring what the son had said.
“They elected to take the word of an aunt over that of the son. According to Naledi’s explanation before this court, they claimed the grandmother or aunt said the deceased’s feet looked like Khohlooa’s, and they were therefore convinced it was his body. They overruled the son and released the body under those circumstances,” Justice Banyane said.
Two weeks later, Naledi was confronted with another crisis when the Ramohapi family arrived to collect their body, only to find it was not there. Naledi staff gave a series of excuses until later, after midnight, when they finally admitted that the body was unavailable.
“As things turned out, some weeks later, when the Ramohapis came to collect the body of their deceased, Mr Ramohapi, they only realised after arriving home, after the hearse driver had left, that the body was not theirs.
“They immediately requested the driver to return the corpse to the mortuary. Upon arrival, according to the deceased’s daughter, she was shown pictures and only then given an opportunity to examine the body. She realised the shoes did not fit and the trousers did not fit. Essentially, the body had not been treated properly, as the investigations revealed.
“However, Naledi instructed the family to proceed with the funeral, despite knowing there was no body. They claimed it was somewhere in Mokhotlong and would be delivered early in the morning. They even instructed the family to continue buying groceries and preparing for the funeral.
“After midnight, Naledi called again to inform the family that the body had in fact been buried by the Khohlooas and that the process of exhumation would have to begin,” the judge said.
Justice Banyane said Naledi had failed to treat the deceased with dignity and respect.
“To me, this is a clear case of a funeral service provider failing to treat a human body with dignity. A human body, whether alive or dead, must be treated with dignity.
“When funeral parlours receive bodies, they make an undertaking to families that they will manage those bodies properly and return them for burial. Unfortunately, that did not happen here.
“This case highlights how important it is to respect families when they raise concerns. Proper identification is critical. In Mr Ramohapi’s case, there was nothing attached to identify him. One wonders whether this is an isolated incident or something that happens frequently but never reaches court.
“When bodies are treated properly, families are able to grieve, find closure and avoid prolonged suffering. What Naledi did in this case only prolonged the grief of families who were already traumatised, and that cannot be accepted,” she said.
Negotiations between the families and Naledi collapsed twice, particularly over burial expenses. This prompted Justice Banyane to intervene directly and summon the parties to her chambers. After lengthy discussions, an agreement was finally reached.
The court ordered that Naledi’s application to exhume Mr Ramohapi’s body be granted, with the process to be completed no later than 29 January 2026. Naledi was also directed to release the body of Mr Khohlooa to his family for burial.
Naledi was ordered to bear all funeral costs for both families, including providing caskets, a cow, and delivering these to the respective households.
The company was further ordered to pay M21 900 in funeral expenses to the Khohlooa family and M29 000 to the Ramohapi family by 28 January 2026.
Naledi must also transport the deceased from its Khubetsoana mortuary to Sefikeng and Malealea, and from the families’ homes to their respective cemeteries.
In addition, the funeral company was ordered to compensate both families with M60 000 each for emotional trauma, payable in instalments of M10 000 over six months.
Justice Banyane concluded by ordering all parties to return to court on 4 February 2026 for a progress report.
