…as former PS battles DPP and DCEO over M40 million fraud case
Moorosi Tsiane
FORMER Local Government Principal Secretary (PS), Lefu Manyokole, is challenging the decision to try him before the High Court, arguing that the Directorate on Corruption and Economic Offences (DCEO) and the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) acted unlawfully by moving his fraud case from the Maseru Magistrates Court.
On Monday, Mr Manyokole, through his lawyer Advocate (Adv) Mahlomola Manyokole, informed trial judge, Justice ’Maliepollo Makhetha, that he intends to challenge the decision to transfer the case to the High Court. He contends that once the DPP has issued a directive for the DCEO to prosecute the case before the Magistrates Court, there should not be any changes by the DPP.
Justice Makhetha directed him to file his application the same day and set the matter for hearing on Wednesday.
Yesterday, Adv Manyokole argued that it was unlawful for the DPP to indict his client in the High Court without giving him an opportunity to make representations.
He described the decision as irrational, malicious, and unconstitutional, claiming it violates Mr Manyokole’s rights under section 12 of the Constitution.
“…The decision to indict me in the High Court is again legally flawed and unlawful because the DPP failed to give me or the other accused the reasons for her decision. As the repository of power, the DPP is enjoined by law to make just and fair administrative decisions. In this matter, she failed to do so, and therefore her decision must be set aside as unlawful. The Magistrate Court was legally competent to deal with the criminal matter as it did before without impediments, legal or otherwise,” argued Adv Manyokole.
He further submitted that before invoking section 144 of the Criminal Procedure and Evidence Act (CP&E) of 1981, the DPP had to establish jurisdictional facts such as interference with witnesses, threats to state security, or overriding public interest—none of which, he said, applied to his cleint’s case.
Adv Manyokole accused both the DPP and the DCEO of abusing their powers.
“The DPP’s decision amounts to abuse of power and is not supported by any piece of evidence. She acted on no evidence, which is a clear indication that she improperly exercised her mind. This irrational decision cannot be allowed to stand.”
He also said Mr Manyokole would suffer prejudice should the trial proceed in the High Court, as he had lost his former counsel, Adv Salemane Phafane KC, due to unaffordable fees at that level of court—fees he had previously managed at the Magistrate Court.
Citing section 43 of the Prevention of Corruption and Economic Offences Act, 1999, Adv Manyokole insisted that once the DCEO is authorized to prosecute, the DPP no longer has a role in the matter.
He therefore asked the court to review and set aside the DPP’s decision, and to order that the case (CRI/T/MSU/0211/23) proceed in the Magistrate Court to finality.
However, the Acting DPP, Adv Lehlanako Mofilikoane, who was represented by Adv Jay Naidoo along with the DCEO, strongly opposed the application, arguing that section 144(1)(b) of the CP&E grants her office discretion to decide where accused persons should be tried.
“Section 144(1)(b) clothes the office of the DPP with discretion of choice as to where an accused should be tried, when jurisdictional considerations exist. The law does not require a consultative process with the accused, nor does it compel the DPP to provide reasons or justification for indicting a case before the High Court,” Adv Naidoo said.
He said although the case could be heard at the Magistrate Court, the High Court also had jurisdiction.
“It is not in dispute that the charges are justiciable in the Subordinate Courts. However, this in no way fetters the inherent common law jurisdiction of the High Court to try any matter presented before it. Corruption, fraud, and money laundering are by nature complex crimes. When such crimes involve State resources, they are undoubtedly of public interest and cannot be considered minor.”
Adv Naidoo urged the court to dismiss the application with punitive costs, calling it “out of time, frivolous, and completely without merit”.
Mr Manyokole was joined by former Local Government PS Nonkululeko Zaly, in the application.
The duo was charged alongside former cabinet PS Thabo Motoko, and several others for allegedly embezzling M39,959,159.30 in state funds during the state of emergency declared by former Prime Minister Moeketsi Majoro after the 2021–2022 floods.
Other accused include former Disaster Management Authority (DMA) boss Makhotso Mahosi (who was killed in a 2023 robbery alongside her son), Ketso Baba Ketso and his companies Kypros and Maru-a-Pula, Mooka Namoli, Setofolo Ramarou, Pule Thoahlane, Chipo Hulela, Keketso Makoko, and two companies—Gee M Construction and Botselo Pty Ltd.
All accused were released on M20 000 bail with conditions that they attend remands, refrain from interfering with witnesses, and stand trial to finality.
Messrs Namoli, Ramarou, and Thoahlane later faced four additional charges of fraud, corruption, money laundering, and bribery.
The rest of the accused have not joined Mr Manyokole’s application.
Justice Makhetha reserved judgement to 17 October 2025.
