The demise of civil society: Who will protect Basotho?

THERE was a time in Lesotho when civil society was not merely a collection of organisations occupying offices, holding workshops and issuing carefully worded statements. It was a necessary counterweight to political power.

When the governments overreached, civil society spoke. When citizens’ rights were threatened, civil society intervened. When political tensions endangered national stability, churches, non-the governmental organisations, professional bodies and civic groups provided a platform for dialogue. That role is now under serious threat.

The disturbing question facing Basotho is no longer simply whether individual civil society organisations remain independent. It is whether Lesotho is witnessing the slow demise of civil society as an effective check on the government power.

The controversy surrounding the Christian Council of Lesotho (CCL) and the appointment of its board chairperson, Reverend Monaheng Sekese, to the board of the Lesotho Electricity and Water Authority (LEWA) has brought this concern into sharp focus.

The appointment itself is not necessarily wrong. A citizen does not surrender his or her right to participate in public institutions simply because they have served in civil society. Nor should public appointments automatically be interpreted as political patronage.

But where the person concerned occupies a leadership position in an organisation whose historic responsibility includes holding the government accountable, legitimate questions about independence and conflicts of interest cannot simply be dismissed.

The CCL has historically been regarded as an important moral and civic voice in Lesotho, particularly on good governance, human rights, civic education, elections, conflict management and rights-based advocacy. That reputation creates an obligation for transparency.

If Rev Sekese remains CCL chairperson while serving on a government regulatory board, Basotho deserve to know how the potential conflict of interest will be managed. If he has resigned, the CCL should say so clearly. Silence only fuels suspicion. This is not about attacking Rev Sekese. It is about protecting institutions.

More worrying, however, is the broader pattern alleged by opposition leaders: prominent members of civil society being absorbed into the government structures, leaving the organisations they once led or energised weaker and less vocal.

Former Lesotho Council of Non-The governmental Organisations executive director, Seabata Motsamai, is now in the Senate. Development for Peace Education coordinator, Sofonea Shale, has been appointed Chief of Staff in the Office of the Prime Minister.

Opposition leader, Mathibeli Mokhothu, argues that such appointments have deprived civil society organisations of some of their most vocal members.

While the government has every right to appoint competent Basotho to public positions, the danger lies not in employing people from civil society but creating a situation in which the state becomes so successful at recruiting civic leaders that it empties civil society of the people capable and willing to challenge it.

A democracy cannot function properly when almost everyone with the experience, credibility and courage to question the government eventually becomes part of the government. There must be people outside the state who can say: this is wrong.

There must be organisations that can demand answers without fearing that their funding, access, employment opportunities or relationships with those in power will be affected.

There must be churches, journalists, lawyers, activists, academics, professional associations and ordinary citizens who remain free to scrutinise those who govern.

Otherwise, democracy becomes little more than elections followed by four or five years of unchecked political authority.

The opposition’s criticism that the government has effectively weakened civil society by absorbing its activists should therefore not be dismissed merely as partisan rhetoric. It deserves serious public debate. The allegation is that organisations such as CCL, LCN and DPE have lost some of their most active voices following appointments to the government.

Whether this amounts to deliberate capture is a question that requires evidence. But the consequence is visible enough to warrant concern: a civic space that appears quieter when it should be louder.

The silence of some organisations on contentious national issues makes this particularly troubling.

The CCL, for example, has been criticised for not intervening publicly on matters such as the confrontation between the government and opposition over national reforms, allegations surrounding the State House, and the alleged attack and abduction of journalist Kananelo Boloetse. Critics say such silence is striking given the organisation’s history of intervening when democracy, human rights and national stability were at stake.

The point is not that every organisation must oppose the government on every issue. That would be equally unhealthy.

Civil society must be independent, not automatically anti-the government. It should praise the government when the government performs well and condemn it when it abuses power. Its loyalty should be to the Constitution, democracy, human dignity and the public interest — not to a political party. That independence is precisely why conflicts of interest matter.

If civic organisations become perceived as extensions of the government, they lose something far more valuable than individual members: public trust. And once public trust is lost, rebuilding it is extremely difficult.

Lesotho has learned, painfully, that democratic institutions cannot be taken for granted. Our history of political instability, constitutional crises and conflict should make us especially protective of every institution capable of restraining political excesses. Civil society is one such institution. The media is another. The judiciary is another. Parliament is another.

All these institutions have different responsibilities, but together they form the architecture that prevents political power from becoming absolute.

That is why the apparent weakening of civil society should concern every Mosotho, regardless of political affiliation. If CCL becomes silent, who speaks for the moral conscience of the nation?

If NGOs become reluctant to challenge the government, who scrutinises public policy from outside Parliament? If activists are continuously absorbed into the government, who remains to organise citizens? If those who speak out are intimidated, threatened or allegedly attacked, who will have the courage to speak next? And if everyone becomes afraid to speak, who will protect Basotho?

The answer cannot always be opposition political parties. Their primary responsibility is political competition and holding the government accountable through Parliament and other political mechanisms. Nor can it be the government itself. Those exercising power cannot simultaneously be the sole guardians against its abuse.

The protection of citizens ultimately depends on a healthy ecosystem of independent institutions and active citizens.

The government should therefore welcome, rather than fear, a strong civil society. A government confident in its record should have nothing to fear from scrutiny. Criticism provides an opportunity to explain decisions, correct mistakes and strengthen public confidence.

Civil society, for its part, must also look inward. Organisations must establish clear rules on conflicts of interest. Leaders appointed to the government positions should make their status within civic organisations transparent. Boards should have clear procedures for managing such situations. Above all, organisations must never allow access to the government to become more important than their independence from the government.

The CCL has an opportunity to address the current controversy directly. It should explain Rev Sekese’s position and reassure Basotho about the organisation’s independence. Silence is not a strategy.

Nor should the government be comfortable with a civic landscape in which critics gradually disappear into public appointments. Lesotho needs more independent voices, not fewer.

The country needs citizens who are prepared to ask difficult questions, journalists who are free to investigate, churches willing to defend the vulnerable, NGOs prepared to challenge bad policy and professional bodies willing to defend constitutional principles.

The demise of civil society would not be the demise of one organisation. It would be the weakening of one of democracy’s most important lines of defence.