By Moorosi Tsiane
FIRED Revenue Services Lesotho (RSL) Commissioner-General, Advocate ‘Mathabo Mokoko’s bid to have members of the RSL Board jailed for alleged contempt of court will come before the Court of Appeal on 13 October 2026.
Adv Mokoko has taken her battle with the tax authority’s board to the apex court, challenging Justice Fumane Khabo’s Labour Appeal Court decision to overturn a Labour Court ruling that had found the board in contempt of court.
She is seeking an order that could see members of the RSL Board committed to prison for allegedly defying an interim court order that barred them from terminating her contract.
The latest development is part of a protracted legal battle over Adv Mokoko’s dismissal, which followed allegations of incompetence, including her alleged failure to resolve mounting tax refund claims and manage reputational risks at the revenue authority.
Adv Mokoko initially challenged her dismissal before the Labour Court, where its President, Teboho Thoso, ruled in her favour.
The RSL Board, dissatisfied with the decision, appealed to the Labour Appeal Court, where Justice Khabo subsequently overturned Adv Thoso’s ruling.
Adv Mokoko has now escalated the dispute to the Court of Appeal, arguing, among other grounds, that Justice Khabo misdirected herself in reversing the Labour Court judgment.
In her papers, she also seeks to revive her complaint that the RSL Board deliberately proceeded with her termination despite being aware of an interim court order restraining it from doing so.
Adv Mokoko provides a detailed account of the events surrounding her dismissal, beginning with her attendance at an African Tax Administration Forum (ATAF) annual meeting in Algeria in November 2025.
According to Adv Mokoko, she had obtained permission from the board to attend the meeting and travelled to Algeria.
“The applicant proceeded to Algeria, on this working trip, and on the 5th of November 2025, she received a WhatsApp message from Adv Lindiwe Sephomolo KC (Board chairperson), demanding that she should check her email promptly,” her papers state.
She says she subsequently discovered that the board had written to her demanding that she show cause why it should not recommend to the Minister of Finance and Development Planning that her tenure be terminated.
“Upon reading her email the applicant found that she had been written a letter by the respondents, signed by Adv Sephomolo requiring applicant to show cause why the Board cannot recommend to the Minister of Finance and Development Planning that her tenure should not be terminated,” she states.
Adv Mokoko argues that the timing and circumstances surrounding the letter demonstrated that the board was not acting in good faith.
“The fact that the letter was written to applicant at a time when she was outside the country on a working trip shows the Board was not acting in good faith,” she states.
“Similarly the fact that the applicant was required to reply within an unreasonably short time of less than 48 hours, while also outside the country is evidence of bad faith,” she adds.
The dispute escalated when Adv Mokoko approached the Labour Court and obtained an interim order.
She alleges that, despite knowing about the order, the board proceeded with her termination.
“It then has come as no surprise that the respondents have intentionally and wilfully disobeyed the order of this Labour Court, though they were aware of it,” she states.
“The respondent proceeded to achieve the termination of the applicant’s contract of service despite being aware of the court order,” she adds.
Adv Mokoko says she received the termination letter while still in Algeria.
“First, on Friday the 7th of November 2025, and at 9:45a.m. Algerian time, applicant received an email attaching a letter from the respondents advising applicant that her tenure had been terminated,” her papers state.
She says she had already notified the board about the court proceedings and the interim order.
“On the 7th of November 2025, at 8:25a.m Algerian time, applicant sent an email to the respondent which is annexed herewith and marked ‘F’,” she states.
“She explained that an application had been filed and moved by her Counsel Mr. (Motiea) Teele KC and, that an interim order was granted returnable on the 11th of November 2025,” she adds.
Adv Mokoko further states that she sent the court order to the board through WhatsApp. She argues that the board’s own termination letter demonstrates that it knew about the court order.
“The termination letter which the respondent sent applicant clearly shows that they were aware of the Court Order annexure ‘D’. It reads in part: ‘Following the show cause letter of the 4th of November 2025, we expected to receive a response showing cause, however we received your email containing and unsigned court documents whose receipts we acknowledge’,” she states.
“First the respondents were clearly aware of the existence of the Court Order,” Adv Mokoko argues.
She further contends that the board knew not only of the court order but also of the ongoing court proceedings.
“On the basis of both the awareness of the Court Order and that their proposed termination of my employment was sub judice, it is established beyond a reasonable doubt that, they proceeded nevertheless.”
Adv Mokoko is now asking the Court of Appeal to find that the board should not be allowed to proceed with the main matter until it has purged the alleged contempt.
“I contend that the Board should not be heard until they have purged their contempt,” she states.
She maintains that the board had already decided to terminate her, pointing to the manner in which the disciplinary process was conducted.
“The respondents had always set their mind on dismissing me as can be seen by: a) Writing applicant to show cause letter as to why her contract could not be terminated when she was in Algeria… b) They proceeded to dismiss me even before 10a.m. on the 7th of November 2025,” her papers state.
Adv Mokoko further seeks to hold the board members personally responsible for the decision to terminate her employment.
She has also given notice that she intends to amend her pleadings to challenge the validity of her dismissal on the basis that it was made while the matter was before the court.
“For the sake of convenience, notice is hereby given…seek the an amendment of pleadings in the main application, to include a prayer that the dismissal is a nullity by reason of violation of the sub judice rule,” she states.
Adv Mokoko wants the RSL Board to be ordered to show cause why it should not be found guilty of contempt of court.
She further asks the court to order the board members to explain why they should not be committed to prison for contempt for a period of not less than six weeks.
She wants any prison sentence to be suspended on condition that the board purges its alleged contempt by reinstating her.
The board has opposed the appeal.
