CJ APPEALS LESOTHO COURT JUDGMENT
MBABANE — Chief Justice Michael Ramodibedi is appealing the judgment of the Constitutional Court of Lesotho. Ramodibedi argues in his latest court papers that Prime Minister Thomas Thabane’s bid to advise King Letsie III to initiate a process to have him impeached should never have been launched without him being heard first.
He stated that the trial court erred and or misdirected itself in failing to hold that his suspension was prejudicial as much as it was common cause that the respondents had failed to pay him the salary benefits as promised.
“The Court a quo erred and /or misdirected itself in holding that there was no justice resulting from the prime minister not affording the appellant (Chief Justice) a hearing prior to making representations in respect of the additional new allegations contained in ground 4.2 and 5 of the proposed impeachment,” he stated.
Last November the High Court, sitting as a Constitutional Court, dismissed his application contesting Thabane’s bid to have him impeached.
This, after the King, on the advice of Thabane, had set up a three judge tribunal to probe Ramodibedi over allegations of judicial misconduct, leading to his possible impeachment.
Ramodibedi had sought to halt the entire process, arguing that his side of the story should have been heard first before the process of establishing the tribunal to probe him had been started.
South African judges, Judge John Musi, Judge Omtheletse Moshidi and Judge Shuled Potterrill, hired to hear the case, dismissed Ramodibedi’s application to interdict the entire process of investigating his alleged misconduct in a ruling delivered on November 22, 2013.
The three judges ruled that Ramodibedi was not entitled to be heard prior to the decision to appoint the tribunal to investigate him.
They insisted that the Appeal Court President would receive a fair hearing in the course of the tribunal’s probe into his alleged misconduct.
The Chief Justice is now appealing against the entire judgment of the three imported High Court judges, who sat as a Constitutional Court and is now set to delay the tribunal’s misconduct investigation against him.
In his appeal, Ramodibedi cites Thabane, the Attorney General and the three South African judges who were appointed to the tribunal to probe him as respondents.
The three tribunal judges are Justices Zachy Yacoob, Yvonne Mokgoro and M Joffe.
Ramodibedi argues that the prime minister’s move to have him impeached is unconstitutional and remains at odds with the doctrine of separation of powers.
Ramodibedi’s lawyers, Advocates Salemane Phafane KC, Zwelakhe Mda KC and Sakoane Sakoane KC, listed several other grounds for his appeal.
But they particularly argue that the failure to afford Justice Ramodibedi a hearing before the initiation of the impeachment process against him had “resulted in the failure of justice.”
They say the court ought to have held that Justice Ramodibedi was entitled to be heard before Thabane made representations to the King under Section 125 (5) of the Constitution.
Failure to do so effectively infringed on Justice Ramodibedi’s fundamental right to procedural fairness, equality before the law and equal protection of the law, thus putting into question the entire process of law, the lawyers argued.
They also say the court erred and misdirected itself in awarding costs against Ramodibedi, thus effectively punishing him for attempting to vindicate his constitutional rights to be heard.
Ramodibedi’s lawyers say the costs order is at odds with the court’s own finding that this was a matter of ‘national interest’.