—PAC declares PS overstepped his mandate
Mohloai Mpesi
THE Public Accounts Committee (PAC) has concluded that the February 2025 suspension of Mokheseng Mokuoane, Project Manager for the Lesotho Renewable Energy and Energy Access Project (LREEAP), was unlawful.
Principal Secretary (PS) of the Ministry of Energy, Tankiso Phapano suspended Mr Mokuoane, whose Project Implementing Unit (PIU) for the LREEAP operates under LEC, in February this year.
Mr Mokuoane has neither received his salary nor benefits for the past six months, since he was suspended.
This was revealed during a PAC session held on Monday this week, where Mr Phapano was extensively questioned.
According to PAC chairperson, ’Machabana Lemphane-Letsie, Mr Phapano lacked the authority to employ, suspend, or dismiss staff from LEC, meaning there was no legal basis for Mr Mokuoane to be barred from work.
“The evidence suggests that there is no valid reason for Mr. Mokuoane to be absent from work,” Ms Lemphane-Letsie said.
“The actions taken by Mr Phapano are illegal and outside of his jurisdiction,” the PAC chairperson said, with PAC members present at the session concurring.
A termination letter seen by the Lesotho Times, addressed to Mr Mokuoane, dated February 12, 2025, and signed by Mr Phapano, titled “Termination of services under contract: Project Manager LREEAP LEC-Contract number: LS-LEC 223204-CS-INDV,” cited misconduct as the reason for Mr Mokuoane’s termination.
The letter explained that after multiple discussions about addressing various misconducts and Mr Mokuoane’s failure to address it, termination was deemed necessary to uphold project integrity and accountability.
Read Mr Phapano’s letter: “After thoughtful deliberation and multiple discussions about addressing various misconducts by Project Manager Mokheseng Mokuoane, along with your continued hesitation to take action, I find myself with no alternative but to terminate his services under the Lesotho Renewable Energy and Energy Access Project (LREEAP) LEC.
“Consequently, upon his performance and adherence to the standards expected of his position (sic). The decision to discontinue the services was made after thorough deliberation. This action is intended to uphold the integrity of the project and promote a standard of accountability.”
Mr Mokuoane, however, told the PAC that he had been on “forced leave” for over six months, during which he stopped receiving his benefits and salary.
He explained that he was not initially notified of his suspension and only later received an email about it, followed by termination of duty.
He added that the PS had directed others to confiscate his work resources and instructed colleagues not to share information with him.
“This has been a forced leave of absence,” he said. “My resources and communication lines have been severed, and I have been left in the dark about my position.”
Adding to the complexity of the case, suspended LEC Director General, Mohlomi Seitlheko, clarified that he had directed Mr Mokuoane to take a leave while they addressed the matter.
Mr Seitlheko said, to his knowledge, Mr Mokuoane was neither suspended nor dismissed, and Mr Phapano’s termination letter was illegal.
“To my knowledge, Mr Mokuoane is neither suspended nor dismissed. I merely requested that he take leave during our deliberations,” he said.
He maintained that “Mr Mokuoane is still an LEC employee” but who now exceeded his authorised leave period and also that he did not have access to his belongings.
Mr Seitlheko corroborated Mr Mokuoane’s claims, confirming that he received a memo from the PS “instructing ministry staff not to assist Mr Mokuoane”.
In turn, Ms Lemphane-Letsie reiterated that the PS had no authority to suspend or dismiss anyone at LEC, declaring the PS’s actions and memo were illegal as he lacked the necessary legal standing (‘locus standi’).
She asserted that Mr Mokuoane should go back to work since “no one with proper authority had suspended him”, concluding that the PS had overstepped his bounds.
Revolution for Prosperity (RFP) legislator for Matala constituency, Dr Tṧeliso Moroke, alluded to the Company’s Act 2011, noting that the government, through the Ministry of Energy, holds shares in LEC, not the Principal Secretary or Deputy Principal Secretary, further indicating the PS’s lack of direct authority over LEC personnel matters.
LEC’s Acting Director General, Nathaniel Maphathe, told the PAC that Mr Mokuoane received his salary from the LREEAP funds, not directly from LEC.
He noted that Mr Mokuoane had not reported for duty since he assumed office, explaining that the latter had cited the non-payment of his salary since January as the reason.
However, Dr Moroke and Ms Lemphane-Letsie argued that Mr Mokuoane was employed by the LEC.
Ms Lemphane-Letsie pointed to a subsidiary agreement, highlighting clauses on project financing stating that “funds were made available to LEC for project implementation, making the company ultimately responsible”.
She stressed that the Acting MD was responsible for this document and could therefore not avoid the issue.
Mr Maphathe responded that the issue was “flawed from the beginning” and required a collaborative approach.
However, a fired up Ms Lemphane-Letsie countered that reinstating Mr Mokuoane did not require consultation but was a matter for the Acting Managing Director to resolve directly.
She emphasised that Mr Mokuoane is the Acting MD’s employee, hired under a contract managed by the MD, and therefore “there is no valid reason for him to remain out of office”.
