…as forensic report recommends corruption probe and police action against Pro-Vice-Chancellor
Mohloai Mpesi
EMBATTLED National University of Lesotho (NUL) Pro-Vice-Chancellor/ Acting Vice-Chancellor, Professor Kananelo Mosito, could find himself a subject of an investigation by the Directorate on Corruption and Economic Offences (DCEO) following a forensic report commissioned by the university.
The report, compiled by independent audit firm Active Forensic Investigations & Audit Services (Active Forensics), recommends that the university refer allegations involving Prof Mosito to the Directorate on Corruption and Economic Offences (DCEO) and the police for investigation and possible prosecution.
The report, dated 5 August 2026, was signed by Mosikili Phakela, Project Assistant Investigator; Advocate Molebatsi Tšepo, Project Lead Investigator; and Advocate Sehleka Sehleka, Project Manager.
The investigation examined allegations of governance malpractice, administrative misconduct, conflicts of interest, abuse of power and financial irregularities at NUL, including an alleged cross-appointment scheme.
The report says the alleged cross-appointments raised governance concerns and created a potential conflict of interest involving Prof Mosito.
“The cross-appointments do not only depict bad governance, but the parties, including the PVC, failed to comply with clause 9.1.2 of the Code, which obliges them to guard and enhance the good image and interest of the University and to refrain from any act that may be detrimental to the interest of the University.
“The cross-appointment scheme has the potential to create a perception of corruption in the eyes of the donor and may lead to a decrease in confidence and trust in the University. Considering the benefits under the MRC, it may be argued that the PVC’s acceptance of the offer under the MRC, particularly when the appointment was made by the very person he had appointed to chair the MRC, was a reward,” the report states.
The report recommends that NUL report the alleged cross-appointment scheme to the DCEO under Section 22(1) of the Prevention of Corruption and Economic Offences Act of 1999.
It further recommends that alleged fraud and breaches of anti-corruption provisions be referred to the police for consolidation of evidence and possible charging.
“Report the cross-appointment schemes to the Directorate on Corruption and Economic Offences (DCEO) for investigation under Section 22(1) of the Prevention of Corruption and Economic Offences Act of 1999.
“Refer the facts relating to fraud and breaches of the anti-corruption provisions of the Prevention of Corruption and Economic Offences Act of 1999 and the Penal Code Act to the Police for consolidation of evidence and charging of the subject.
“Refer the facts relating to intimidation to the Police for consolidation of evidence and charging,” the report states.
DCEO spokesperson, Matlhokomelo Senoko, confirmed that the Directorate had received the report and was studying it.
“The DCEO confirms that it is in receipt of the report regarding the submission of the independent investigation report into allegations of malfeasance and mismanagement against NUL authorities. The DCEO is still studying the report, which is too bulky for immediate consideration,” Ms Senoko said.
Pension demands
According to the forensic report, the investigation found that Prof Mosito allegedly pressured NUL to reinstate pension contributions despite being on a suspended academic contract.
“The investigation confirmed that the PVC aggressively pressured the University to reinstate pension contributions against a suspended academic contract that he was not serving,” the report states.
Conflict of interest
The report also raises allegations of a conflict of interest and procurement irregularities surrounding the appointment of Advocate Nthati Pheko, whom it describes as a close business associate of Prof Mosito from his former private law practice.
The report says Prof Mosito participated in the selection and appointment of Adv Pheko in relation to a staff dispute without declaring the alleged business relationship.
“For an adjudication contract involving a staff dispute, the PVC actively participated in the selection and appointment of Advocate Pheko without declaring that she was a close business associate running his former private law chambers.
“Under the externally funded PoMiSA project, the PVC engaged in an egregious ‘self-contracting’ loop, signing highly irregular agreements as both the ‘Client’ and the paid ‘Project Manager’, backdating documents to a holiday, and processing unauthorised payouts before the overarching inter-university contracts were legally signed,” the report states.
Alleged intimidation
The forensic report further alleges that Prof Mosito resorted to intimidation when he encountered resistance from the university.
“The scope of misconduct extended to the PoMiSA educational project, where the PVC signed irregular, unvouched contracts between himself as both the client and the project manager to direct personal and financial benefits to himself and two University officials.
“Furthermore, when met with institutional pushback and subsequent suspension, the PVC resorted to intimidation, making death threats in the management WhatsApp group and to Advocate Mamello Makau, in pursuit of his personal interests,” the report states.
The report also raises concerns about Prof Mosito’s position as President of the Court of Appeal while litigating disputes involving NUL before the High Court, saying this creates a perceived conflict of interest.
Prof Mosito has not responded to the forensic report’s allegations as his mobile phone rang unanswered. Prof Mosito, who also serves as the Court of Appeal President, is currently engaged in the second session of the Court of Appeal which began on Tuesday and ends on 20 October 2026.
Criminal trespass case
The forensic report’s recommendation for police action comes as Prof Mosito is already the subject of a criminal trespass case opened by the NUL Council.
The case was opened at Roma Police Station after Prof Mosito reported for work despite the Council having suspended him and instructed him not to enter university premises.
The case followed Prof Mosito’s second suspension by the Council and his subsequent return to NUL on 25 September 2026.
The suspension letter expressly barred Prof Mosito from entering university premises, but he nevertheless reported for work and chaired the Senate meeting that day. The Council subsequently resolved to report the matter to the police.
Prof Mosito has disputed the validity of the suspension, arguing that the Council lacked the legal authority to remove him from office in the manner it had attempted.
In a letter to Council chairperson Dr Khabele Matlosa, Prof Mosito argued that the dispute concerned the statutory powers of the university’s various organs.
He also rejected the Council’s contention that its status as NUL’s supreme governing body gave it unrestricted authority over university administration.
Power struggle
The latest developments are part of a protracted legal and administrative battle between Prof Mosito and the NUL Council over the university’s leadership.
The dispute began when the Council started recruiting a successor to former Vice-Chancellor, Professor Olusola Isaac Fajana, before his term expired on 31 July 2026.
Prof Mosito challenged the recruitment process which began in November 2025 in the High Court in April this year, arguing that the NUL Order, 1992, required him, as Pro-Vice-Chancellor, to assume the Vice-Chancellor’s functions once the office became vacant.
The Council suspended him on 22 April 2026, accusing him of “rendering the university ungovernable in pursuit of personal interests which conflict with the best interests of the university that he should be protecting”. Prof Mosito challenged the suspension in the Labour Court.
On 1 June, Acting Justice of Appeal Phillip Musonda halted the recruitment process and ordered that the statutory succession mechanism be preserved.
When Prof Fajana’s contract expired on 31 July, however, Prof Mosito was blocked from entering the Roma campus and the Council appointed Professor Motlatsi Molati as Acting Vice-Chancellor. The Council subsequently terminated Prof Mosito’s four-year contract as Pro-Vice-Chancellor on 2 August, two years before its scheduled expiry, although it said he remained an academic staff member in the Faculty of Law.
The Court of Appeal on 14 September later found that the Council had failed to comply with the June order. It declared Prof Molati’s appointment and Prof Mosito’s dismissal ineffective for as long as the June order remained operative and directed that the consequences of those decisions be reversed.
Prof Mosito returned to NUL the following day and subsequently lifted the suspension of substantive Registrar Liteboho Maqalika-Lerotholi and terminated Dr Lipalesa Mathe’s appointment as Acting Registrar. The Council directed him to reverse those decisions.
On 23 September, the Council resolved to suspend Prof Mosito from the office of Acting Vice-Chancellor with immediate effect. In a letter dated 24 September, Dr Matlosa said the suspension followed Prof Mosito’s failure to comply with a directive to reverse the decisions concerning the Registrar.
Prof Mosito rejected the suspension and maintained that the Council had no legal authority to remove him from office in that manner.
The dispute subsequently spilled into the criminal justice system when the Council reported the alleged trespass to the police.
