THE former Chief Executive Officer of the Lesotho Communication's Authority (LCA), Advocate Mamarame Matela who is being sued by the authority will have her day in court on November 25 when the case against her proceeds.
Sept. 13, 2022
2 min read
Matela to know her fate in November
Former LCA boss, Adv 'Mamarame Matela
Metro Audio Articles
Catch our weekly audio news daily only on Metro Radio Podcast News.listen now
The matter was postponed last week after the respondent filed an appeal against a decision by the High Court.
The court had earlier dismissed an application by the respondent who had argued that the court did not have the jurisdiction to hear the matter.
The arguments on jurisdiction were made after the same court heard and dismissed an application for recusal of the judge who presided over the case.
Matela wanted the presiding judge to recuse himself from the case on the grounds that he might be bias in dealing with the matter.
She had argued that owing to a personal relationship her family and the judge’s had, coupled with their respective professional relationship, the judge might not be able to bring an impartial mind in the case.
She said during her tenure of office at the LCA, the authority fined Vodacom Lesotho M8.5 million for non-compliance.
At the time, she said, the judge’s wife acted as a legal advisor to Vodacom.
She had also shown that legal advisors are among others mandated to ensure that the companies they present do not incur unnecessary costs.
She had argued that the judge’s wife might have discussed the matter with her husband out of frustration and fear of a disciplinary action being taken against her, as a result, a reasonable person might form an opinion that the judge might be bias in the case.
In his submission, Attorney Qhalehang Letsika for the LCA argued that Matela had not established evidence that the judge was likely to be partial adding that her allegations were baseless.
Enjoy our daily newsletter from today
Access exclusive newsletters, along with previews of new media releases.
He had therefore asked that the application for recusal be dismissed with costs.
The respondents had in their papers argued that the fact the judge had taken an oath to uphold the Constitution and other laws as well as to administer justice without fear or favour, would enable him to carry out his oath of office diligently.
They assumed that the judge could disabuse his mind of irrelevant personal beliefs and predispositions.
The LCA is in the main matter asking the court to issue an order against Matela to return properties belonging to the authority, which are still in her possession. - LeNA