…says it is unlawful to pay for trip from the contingency fund
Mohloai Mpesi
OPPOSITION parties have come down heavily on what they say is the government’s reckless decision to draw over M1 million from the contingency fund to finance Deputy Prime Minister (DPM) Nthomeng Majara’s trip to Brazil.
The opposition argues that using the contingency fund for international travel is unlawful and unconstitutional, insisting that the matter should be challenged in court.
Ms Majara is currently attending the 30th Meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (COP30), under way from 10 to 21 November 2025 in Belem, Brazil.
A letter dated 30 October 2025, written by the Principal Secretary in the Ministry of Finance and Development Planning, Nthoateng Lebona, requested an advance of M1,087,468 from the contingency fund to cover the DPM’s trip, which the Minister approved the following day.
According to the request, the contingency fund stood at M955,684,354, with M528,824,258 already released and M426,860,096 remaining.
The application for Ms Majara’s M1 million trip justified the use of the contingency fund as follows:
“Whereas it has become necessary in the interest of the Public Service to incur certain and unforeseen expenditure not provided for in the estimates, authority to expend the amount specified in the schedule below is sought until such time as supplementary estimates can be laid before Parliament in terms of section 114 (2) of the Constitution.
“Additional funding is required to support the Deputy Prime Minister’s participation in the 30th UN Climate Change Conference (COP30) in Brazil, where the DPM will be representing the Prime Minister.”
Spotlight on contingency fund
LEADER of the Democratic Congress (DC), Mathibeli Mokhothu, has accused the government of misusing the national contingency fund to finance international trips.
Mr Mokhothu told the Lesotho Times this week that he was aware that most ministries had already exhausted their budgets for international travel and operations, prompting them to draw funds from the contingency allocation — an act that he described as unlawful and unconstitutional.
“Most government ministries have run out of their international travel budgets within six months of the 2024/2025 financial year,” Mr Mokhothu said.
“They finished their operational budgets through endless trips abroad and constant virements. Even after parliament reduced allocations for international travel, the executive went ahead and increased them beyond the ceiling set by parliament. They have defied spending controls and are now taking money from the contingency fund, which is unconstitutional.”
He emphasised that the contingency fund is strictly meant for emergencies and unforeseen events.
“According to the Constitution, contingency funds are reserved for urgent and unforeseen matters like COVID-19, droughts, or floods. Yet these emergencies remain unattended while the Deputy Prime Minister uses over M1 million to travel to Brazil. This is unconstitutional,” he asserted.
Mr Mokhothu said he had previously written to the Speaker of Parliament objecting to what he described as the government’s “abuse of budget processes” when it sought approval to transfer unused 2024/2025 supplementary funds into the 2025/2026 budget.
He claimed that similar practices had occurred in the past financial year.
“Last year, the contingency fund was also depleted by international travel. This year, nearly half of the current M900 million — almost M1 billion — allocated to the contingency fund has already been spent, not on emergencies but on travel. If the Public Accounts Committee requested an audit of contingency spending from April this year, the Auditor-General would find that much of it went to international trips,” he charged.
Court action required
FORMER Popular Front for Democracy (PFD) leader, Advocate Lekhetho Rakuoane, also condemned the practice, insisting that the matter should be tested in court.
“This issue must be taken to court. When an allocation violates the law, it must be challenged legally,” Rakuoane said.
“What makes this worse is that the Minister of Forestry and Environment, Letsema Adontši, who is responsible for climate change issues, did not even attend COP30.
“I have never seen a Deputy Prime Minister attend such a conference while leaving behind the minister in charge of the relevant portfolio. The DPM usually attends the high-level sessions, while the minister handles the technical resolutions — but in this case, the minister was absent.”
He accused the government of taking the trip “for pleasure rather than substance.”
“If the minister didn’t go, it means they didn’t take the event seriously. It was just an opportunity to enjoy public funds,” Rakuoane said, adding that it was “likely” the international travel budget had already been exhausted.
“They are undermining parliament, which deliberately reduced the travel budget. They take this as a joke and continue allocating money to themselves.”
Feeding trough
MEANWHILE, the tough-talking HOPE-Mphatlalatsane leader, ’Machabana Lemphane-Letsie, echoed similar sentiments, saying the executive had ignored parliamentary resolutions to reduce per diems and international travel allowances.
The per diems had become a feeding trough for ministers and officials, spending most of their time on foreign trips whose benefit to the country remained unsubstantiated, she said.
“This is wrong. The contingency fund is for emergencies that were not planned for — it cannot be used for per diems. When we debated the current financial year’s budget, we worked hard to reduce these per diems, but the government has proven us right by taking money not appropriated by parliament. That is unlawful,” she said.
Ms Lemphane-Letsie also criticised Minister of Finance and Development Planning, Dr Retšelisitsoe Matlanyane, for failing to table the supplementary budget and the Auditor-General’s report before parliament.
“It’s now mid-November, and the Minister should have already submitted a supplementary budget if she had exhausted the allocated funds. Parliament will soon close for the Christmas recess, and when it reopens, we will be dealing with the new annual budget estimates. I don’t know how we’ll manage that process amid these irregularities,” she said.
She also said the Auditor-General, ‘Mathabo Makenete, had submitted her report for the financial year ending March 2023 to the Minister on 9 May 2025, but it still had not been tabled before parliament — contrary to Section 117(4) of the Constitution, which requires the Minister to do so within seven days of receiving it once parliament reconvenes.
“Dr Matlanyane has still not tabled the Auditor-General’s report or the supplementary budget. On top of that, the executive continues allocating funds not approved by parliament. It seems they expect parliament to act merely as a rubber stamp.
“Budgeting under these circumstances will not be an easy process. The budget should reflect progress and accountability, not blind endorsement of what the executive brings before us.”
“Fund has always been confidential”
CONTACTED for comment, Government Spokesperson Thabo Sekonyela, dismissed criticism over the use of the national contingency fund, saying previous regimes never declared or detailed how the fund was utilised.
“For my part, I have never heard of any previous government declaring and detailing how the contingency fund was used,” Mr Sekonyela told this publication.
“We have to handle matters properly. To my knowledge, in Lesotho, the contingency fund has never been below M20 million, yet I have never heard of anyone explaining what it does. I have also never known of any year when it was reviewed or its performance detailed,” he said.
Mr Sekonyela explained that the contingency fund is meant to address emergencies but can also be used in situations where budget allocations fall short of government needs.
“Yes, it is true that the contingency fund is meant to address emergencies, and it may also be used when budget estimates allocated for government purposes appear insufficient to meet national commitments,” he said.
When asked to explain what the recently released total advance of M528,824,258 has been used for, Mr Sekonyela challenged the reporter to show whether, historically, any government had ever publicised a detailed report of the fund’s use.
“Tell me, historically, when has the contingency fund ever been publicised to declare what it has been used for? Gather all those people who say it should be publicised and answer that question yourselves,” he said.
He further argued that those questioning the expenditure do not have the authority to approve or adjust the budget, as such powers rest with Parliament.
Public outcry “mere noise”
“PEOPLE who approve the budget are the ones to whom accountability is owed. The only stake others have is through their representatives in Parliament. To date, there has not been any report to parliamentarians detailing how the contingency fund was used,” he said.
Mr Sekonyela acknowledged that while the public deserves to know how the money is utilised, such information will be provided at the appropriate time.
“Yes, the nation deserves to know how the money was used, but the question is — at what juncture? Those who have been allocated the funds will explain, at the right time, how the money was utilised. It would be premature to audit those who were lawfully allocated money by Parliament before Parliament itself has been briefed.
“Do you question a person who has just been allocated funds by Parliament the very next day, or do you wait for them to use the money according to their needs and then audit them afterward? In this case, there has not even been a report yet. It is only your interest. The report will be made at the right time in Parliament, where the budget was allocated.”
He went on to argue that the public outcry over the contingency fund was “mere noise”, saying those criticising the expenditure had no authority to change or influence the budget.
“Unfortunately, apart from this noise people make, they have no power to increase or decrease that budget. So, your interest, in other words, is neither here nor there.”
Mr Sekonyela added that the recent government delegation attended a conference on deforestation, which, he said, aligns with the objectives of the contingency fund, since the fund can be used for unforeseen or urgent national priorities.
“The contingency fund is meant for situations where its utilisation goes beyond the original mandate of the budget,” he said.
