Mathatisi Sebusi
MASERU Central Correctional Institution (MCCI) second-in-command, Senior Superintendent Leluma Mahlelebe, was this week compelled to identify officers implicated in the torture of inmates in December last year.
He identified them after he had been warned that he risked a six-month imprisonment term and a M500 fine if he did not do so.
The ultimatum was issued by Justice Kealeboha Mathaba, chairperson of the commission of inquiry investigating the escape and subsequent torture of inmates following a December 21, 2023, prison break.
Justice Mathaba did so after SSP Mahlelebe sought to be excused from identifying and mentioning names of officers who were present on the day, and those who played a direct part in the torture of the two inmates following their recapture.
He had been asked to identify the torturers of Seboka Motumi and Bokang Tsoako, which resulted in the latter’s death. Failure to cooperate with the commission, could earn him a six-month jail term, a M500 fine or both, Judge Mathaba said.
However, a reluctant SSP Mahlelebe had told the commission that identifying officers from the footage as directed, which was playing in the presence of the suspects and the media, would jeopardise his life.
“I feel unsafe pointing out people and naming them from the footage. The people I will be pointing might end up being charged in the courts of law and they might blame me for their dilemma. I feel that my life will be in danger, especially because these are people who always hold guns and might shoot and kill me,” SSP Mahlelebe said.
“This incident is like that one which happened at the Lesotho Defence Force (LDF), where officers shot their commander claiming that he was sabotaging them. I therefore, humbly request that I be excused from identify them.”
The Commission of Inquiry into the Escape of Inmates from Lesotho Correctional Service Facility was established by the government on 5 April, 2024, to investigate the prison break and torture of prisoners at the MCCI in December 2023.
The commission comprises the trio of Justice Mathaba who is the chairperson, Adv Kelebone Maope and former LCS Commissioner Mojalefa Thulo.
The inmates’ assault followed the escape of six awaiting-trial inmates from the MCCI maximum wing on the night of 21 December 2023.
The torture incident resulted in Tsoako’s death on December 22, 2023.
Tsoako had been among the six inmates who had escaped jail. Following his recapture, he was tortured and confirmed dead on arrival at Queen Mamohato Memorial Hospital (QMMH) the following day.
One other inmate, Tlotliso Bereng, sustained grievous injuries, and is now wheelchair bound due to a twisted spine.
Following SSP Mahlelebe’s request, the commission took a break to decide whether to grant his request.
On its return, Justice Mathaba said the Commission would not allow SSP Mahlelebe to not testify before the commission. Neither would they grant his request to not identify officers who were under his leadership.
He said SSP Mahlelebe was also the right person to take disciplinary action against the perpetrators and that identifying them was the first step.
Justice Mathaba also expressed disappointment that a person of SSP Mahlelebe’s status at MCCI was afraid to identify his subordinates.
He said he doubted that if found guilty, SSP Mahlelebe would take any disciplinary action against them.
“We considered the concern you raised. But you are the second in command at this institution, where an inmate who was recaptured and thus defenceless, was beaten to death. The commission has seen the footage confirming the testimonies of witnesses who have already appeared before this commission,” Justice Mathaba said.
“Bokang Tsoako was severely assaulted and later reported dead. The commission saw the footage of when he was tortured. He and another inmate who had come in already injured, were tortured by the officers.
“And now you tell this commission that you are afraid to identify them? Will you even be able to subject them to disciplinary action if need be?”
He said the commission doubted that SSP Mahlelebe had it in him to hold his juniors accountable for their actions, if he could not “do the simple thing of identifying them when asked to”.
He told SSP Mahlelebe that where a criminal offence had happened, action should be taken including “testifying against anyone who committed the offence regardless of the consequences that might follow”.
“Anyone who does not want to take action or testify against anyone who committed an offense, particularly his subordinates, makes us question his leadership credentials,” Justice Mathaba said.
“One of the characteristics of a good leader, is having courage and independence, particularly in taking disciplinary action against subordinates where there is a need, especially where an inmate lost his life.
“The question that arises is, how one can one, compile a report on the death on an inmate, when they cannot identify the offender? The understanding is, you report someone you have identified, and if you withhold such information from the police, it becomes a criminal offence.”
Justice Mathaba said the first step to address the criminal offence by MCCI officers, would be to identify them, something he said the prison’s leadership should have done ages ago, “long before the commission was established”.
He therefore informed SSP Mahlelebe that, while the choice to testify or not was his, refusing to do so would be in contravention of the law, which carried penalties.
“The decision we reached is that you are a compellable witness. The commission is going to ask you questions looking at the footage. I want you to make this decision, after I have informed you of the legal framework, so that when you make your decision, at least you are informed of the consequences of the decision you will make,” Justice Mathaba said.
“I do not want to presume that you are a bad person and say that you are refusing to testify. I consider what you did was just make a request. Still, I have a duty to bring to your attention the relevant legal framework.
The Judge said that in terms of Section 20(1) of the Public Inquiries Act 1994 “…. you are required to answer questions which you are asked by the commission, otherwise you are guilty of an offence and the maximum punishment is six months’ imprisonment or six months imprisonment and a M500 fine. I wanted to align you with this legal provision so that when comes time for the commissioners to ask you questions, and you refuse to answer them, at least you will do it knowing that you are contravening Section 20 (1) of the Public Inquiries Act of 1994.”
He said they were insistent that SSP Mahlelebe answer questions, not because they hated him or due to an element of unfairness. It was because the commission was mandated to investigate what transpired and identify people who tortured inmates. It could not discharge its mandate if it were to excuse witnesses from testifying.
“After all, everybody will come here and say they cannot testify because they are afraid. We have inmates who came before us and testified against officers who look after them on daily basis. Where did they get the courage? They understood that it is a must to testify,” he noted.
Having been convinced by the Judge to cooperate, SSP Mahlelebe was requested to proceed to identify the MCCI officers who were captured by the prison’s cameras, brutally assaulting the two inmates.
He identified MCCI officers starting with an Assistant Commissioner to a Senior Superintendent, a Superintendent then a Chief Officer, whom he said were at the scene when the two inmates were brutally tortured.
Of the MCCI officers identified from the video footage, some were torturing the inmates as their colleagues watched while others tried to stop the assault.
SSP Mahlelebe was also identified arriving at the scene. He told the commission that on the day the inmates were recaptured, MCCI had organised a Christmas party and that the officers were intoxicated.
The footage which was played before the commission, showed MCCI officers drinking alcoholic beverages and torturing inmates while under the influence.
The identification was made in the presence of the implicated officers and a list of the accused was compiled by the Commission.
