Activities
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Report of the Lesotho Democracy Programme (LDP) of the Transformation Resource Centre (TRC) for 2008

The Lesotho Democracy Programme (LDP) held a series of public gatherings between November and December 2008. The workshops were intended to afford constituents an opportunity to meet their MPs to discuss developmental issues and concerns that affect them. Also, the LDP is a forum for government and for soliciting feedback on parliamentary issues and policy implementation. Equally important is the input of civil society and the feedback they expect to get on policy and legislative implementation which will strengthen channels of communication and enhance the quality of policy design. The programme is meant to bring to light the demand side of good governance based on active involvement of citizens in claiming accountability from their elected representatives. political leaders as well as to enable MPs to sensitize their constituents on proceedings in parliament in the form of constituency clinics/surgeries and constituency. The LDP held a public debate at Ha-Tumahole, Mathokoanein the district of Leribeto enhance public engagement with constituents. The intention of the debate was to improve parliamentary engagement with the electorate as well as to elicit feedback from constituencies on parliament. Subsequent to this, follow-up public gatherings were held as a result of a request by the Principal Chief of Tsikoane, Peka and Kolbere and all other chiefs under her jurisdiction. The purpose of the workshop was to discuss the importance of Members of Parliament’s regular contact with constituents. It was also meant to forge harmonious relations between the people and their representatives in Parliament as well as to enhance their effective service delivery in constituencies. The LDP has however established that most of the concerns presented by constituents cut across all constituencies - developmental needs, parliamentary and law making issues, civic and voter education on the country’s Constitution and proper mechanisms in to be put place to strengthen relations in constituencies between MPs, constituents and councils. The debate centred on Parliament issues and parliamentarians’ roles, but with more emphasis placed on building relations between parliament, MPs and constituents.

Another workshop was held at Pitseng for Lobby groups from Hlotse, Butha-Buthe, Pela- Tšoeu and Likhetlane constituencies to capacitate them on parliamentary issues, local governance and public participation in parliament. The programme also held a workshop for Civil Society organisations and Parliament relationsheld at Lehakoe recreational Centre. The objective of the workshop was to enhance Community Lobby Group’s capacity so that they perform their duties effectively in educating and mobilising communities and decision makers.

They should harness their political support for the concern they raise with their representatives, by generating efforts at a local level, lobbyist to convince lawmakers to fight for causes important to the community. The workshop was also meant to help them on providing linkages between parliament/parliamentarians/ constituents. 28 participants were drawn from four constituencies namely: Hlotse, Likhetlane, Butha-Buthe and Pela Tsoeu .

At the Tumahole workshop, it became evident that MPs do not report back to constituents. The workshop discovered that most MPs (current and former) did few constituency clinics and reporting back. It raised the issue of parliamentarians’ behaviour between elections where a huge gap develops between parliament and the people. The basic principle is that MPs must uphold is that constituents enjoy an unalienable right to demand their representatives’ accountability. Nonetheless, this is often measured by developmental activities and projects that the individual MP has brought to a particular constituency rather than their parliamentary mandate, which is to make laws.

MPs should feel obliged to account for their work to constituents since accountability is a major component of parliamentary democracy or wait till elections to again try to seek re-election from electorates.

LDP is currently equipping constituents with skills on how they should hold their representatives and councils accountable. Leaders at all levels of decision-making and electing representatives have been approached. However, the process is slow and it is normally during elections that constituents feel more empowered to make such demands. It was apparent that the MP of this area does not report back to communities and does not honour his consultative meetings with constituents.

The seemingly declining confidence and trust among Basotho in their respective MPs and elections which is caused by MPs’ delivery as demanded by the mandate conferred on them. This calls for more effort from MPs to visit their constituencies to advocate for change in their constituencies. The notion of representation of the electorate is still at its lowest ebb.

LDP’s advocacy centres on pressing for responsiveness of MPs to the needs and demands of their constituent irrespective of political affiliation. Lesotho poverty-ridden, hit by poverty, unemployment and illiteracy especially in the rural areas. As a result, MPs have a responsibility to provide their constituents with information about parliament, government and law making processes. They should also forge harmonious relations with civil society organisations such TRC through LDP in their respective objectives and missions. Of course both institutions should be more organised and performing in an effective manner.

There is a paradigm shift in the conceptualisation of the role Parliament. Constituents have shifted from dormancy to demanding services. They also want certain provisions of The Constitution to be amended so that they can have a bigger say in recalling their respective MPs, whenever they do not deliver on their mandate. An MP should be held to account or be removed from office so that a new candidate could be voted in. but constituents have not come to that stage where they can recall their representatives if they do not fulfil the mandates for which they were elected to Parliament or community councils. MPs also have a duty to explain and their people about the dynamics of the Mixed Member electoral system which is currently used in Lesotho so that they can make informed decisions during elections. Evidently there is a need to increase voter and civic education, not only prior to elections, but as a continuous exercise. The FPP and PR model should be extensively dealt with so that constituents could have a sense of representation and inclusion when they cast their vote.

LDP has held many public hearings in different constituencies and almost all concerns are the same which means that concentration should be mostly on approaching and collaborating with MPs, local councils for further implementation and execution. It should be noted that constituents should not expect that MPs and Parliament to come to them but should rightfully come to legislature to demand that they be served and their contribution and voices be heard. The relationship between MPs and constituents and Parliament should be cooperative and mutually supportive of one another. Both parties should be more organised, efficient, effective and more forthcoming in their action. Because LDP advocates for public, it should be seen more being contributors and supporters of parliamentary and participatory democracy and being a major link between parliament, Legislature and Execuitve; with public interest at a centre stage. Parliamentary Committees as LDP has already started collaborating with them in bridging the gap between public and parliament should be utilised extensively for better penetration of parliament and answer to public concerns in years to come. LDP has achieved networking, exchanging and disseminating information for public benefit. Subsequently, legislators would be able to scrutinise and amend laws or policy objectively for the advantage and interest of the public thus public participation would be taken seriously with a sense of involvement and ownership in political process and democracy. Because LDP enhances public policy engagement and improve relations between Members and constituents; it cannot be overemphasised the importance of MPs/constituents relations in parliamentary affairs, as in democratic governments/legislatures routinely consult, interact and exchange views and information access with the public; so that citizens can express their preferences and provide their support for decisions that affect their lives and livelihoods. Dealing with elected representatives on an on-going basis, which Basotho needs, strengthens the relationship between legislators and constituents and increases the possibility of legislators acting on their behalf.

LDP and Democracy department held a two day workshop for Community Lobby Groups whose theme was ‘Strengthening of public engagement with Parliament and improving relations with constituents/Parliamentarians in constituencies’. Though participation was active and most participants were willing to share their respective experiences but still were unaware of their being and purpose of the workshop. However, it should be noted that lobby groups are instrumental actors in politics. They direct their efforts towards influencing the local, legislative and executive branches of government. By providing in-depth knowledge on specific issues and solutions to complex problem, and through promises of continued support, lobby groups work to persuade legislators to endorse legislation favourable to the lobby and community they represent. Because LDP strives to strengthen parliamentary democracy in Lesotho and improve parliamentary engagement with Basotho, it is found to be imperative to educate community representatives so as they can mobilise public to be actively involved in policy and law making engagements. If community lobby groups are incapacitated, communication to central and local government would not have community participation inclusion of consultation and more emphasis on community needs; which is contrary to need of improved quality decisions, improved community relations and increase of local capacity to understand and manage their affairs. All these attributes are to bring parliament closer to the people politically and physically and improve public engagement in parliamentary affairs.

Further, Community members must have a keen understanding of how the policy process works in order to ensure a high level of activity at the grassroots level. Lobbies, civic education groups, and other advocacy groups have the duty to educate their community on the ins and outs of the political process. Workshops such as this, seminars, and other educational tools provide communities with an understanding of how to effectively translate their interests into results. How does a lobby group influence the MP to advocate for laws which would have community interest at heart, as political capital is best generated at the local level? Emphasis was on communities leverage political support which is done by building mutually beneficial relationships with local politicians, which can eventually be translated into influence at the national level. Relationships with local officials must be established, nurtured, and maintained, while a genuine interest and commitment to local issues that fall outside the realm of a community’s broader interests must also be developed.

Several other issues were debated generally on parliament and parliamentary committees, National Assembly Standing Orders (NASOs) particularly on Public participation and committees; local governance, relations between MPs and lobby groups with regard to parliamentary issue, and means of working together in parliamentary processes (advocacy and lobby skills). Because LDP has educated communities in parliament and its committees much understanding was displayed however interest was on sections in the NASOs especially on public participation which includes facilitation of public participation, admission of public institutionalised days, petitions and committees particularly on written and verbal submissions to committees. Groups encompassed the issue of public participation and requested that MPs be receptive and collaborate on this important issue in history of democracy in Lesotho. The lobby groups are expected to give another channel to citizenry concerns to policy makers and administrators. However, there are significant concerns of privileged access of the richer and better organised which would shadow those of poor and unorganised. Committees need to be advanced in lobbying and community activism to execute their respective roles properly and with assistance of decision makers in this respect.

With regard to local government, groups expected them to be more representative than representatives in the national parliament as they have voted for their leaders and representatives. They must act on the will of the people as they have the right to have a say in the way the government should work. However, it was found out that local government is overshadowed by conflict between councillors and chiefs, overlapping of roles of both chiefs and councillors and generally local government being misunderstood because it was not properly introduced to communities and is seen to be politically motivated. Most debates centred on local government and its challenges. Apparently is the area that needs to be revisited with much emphasis on Local Government Act and all its amendments and roles of councils. Not only are the lobby groups confused about roles of local councils but also the nation as a whole. Role of local councils and Local Government Act were debated at length and different scenarios were tabulated to give a broader picture of local governance. Nonetheless most committee members concern was lobby groups have been established in the presence of area chiefs and respective MPs however, their existence would be a challenge to local government because they would be seen as usurping powers of local authorities. LDP should make a speedy follow up on inviting both the lobby groups and local councillors to a meeting for introduction and call for collaboration from both angles. There was a call for building good relations with decision makers and key role players because the stronger the ties of trust, mutual support and credibility between them the more effective is lobbying action.

Further lobbying was dealt with, juxtaposed with advocacy and influencing decision makers. Basically a group, organisation or association seeking to influence passage or defeat of legislation, there should be direct attempt influence of lawmakers through personal interviews and persuasion, attempts at indirect influence, or grassroots influence could be termed as lobbying. There should be support of a position which one believes is right or to take a certain action; hence organisations and individuals can lobby to directly influence decisions being made in all spheres of government. It should be emphasised that local government, legislature and executive could be lobbied in all respects. It should be noted that those who have power to take action to support the needs and interests should be utilised by those who do not have direct power and influence. Debates also concentrated on main categories of decision makers and role players that should be targeted for lobbying such as: people who would support one’s cause-provision of information and support needed; people who are undecided; people who oppose one’s cause-these group is against the cause so their stand view is very important.

Constituents/MP’s relations which was a core of discussion was found to be challenging as it was found that most MPs do not report back to constituents and this evidently a national challenge; hold few constituency clinics and there is absence of public information on parliament especially in constituency offices, which are supposed to be resource centres for communities. It was concurred that methods of lobbying which should be used include: holding meetings with decision makers such local councillors and MPs; provision of information to role players, committees and government officials; making submissions to committees, meetings/public hearings; attending hearings where policy is discussed; negotiating with decision makers and other lobby groups; writing formal letters stating ones position; submitting petitions to relevant committees and ministries and having discussions with people in informal situations. It was suggested meeting with representatives should be utilised fully and whenever and wherever they meet there should deliberate on issues and communities’ concerns. Other methods of lobbying include activities away from the main decision makers for instance: speaking with media, holding conferences, visiting news editors, helping reporters with stories; building alliance with other organisations, public letter-writing campaigns and public campaigns such as rallies and demonstrations. As a form of feedback and execution representatives are expected to write to ministers involved or government departments; see the minister personally; ask parliament question, speak in government debate and use ones influence in committees.

To conclude lobby groups were given different scenarios concerning challenges in local councillors, parliament and MPs so that they can apply knowledge they have gained thus far to practice. The bad and worst scenarios were given, though groups displayed wide knowledge of parliament and local government, it was evident that they still lack technical know how of dealing with headstrong MPs and local councillors who do not report back, hold few constituency clinics and consultative meetings. One can observe that party candidates are still not locally connected thus parties nominate party candidates that serve interest of the party rather of local people; which could make parties very unpopular. The group showed grasping and comprehension on how to lobby and advocate for communities. Relations between MPs and lobby groups were stated as a linkage between the MP and constituents. in some instances traditional leaders were involved in these scenarios and public hearings utilised for reporting back to constituents majors used and encouraging cooperation and unity within communities emphatically disregarding political affiliations. Apparently lobby groups are still not clear on ways to approach decision makers and make greater influence and get favourable feedback on MPs who discriminate constituents who do not support him or her.

The issue of who deals with developmental needs of society is still a challenge, because Lesotho developments need formerly depended on MPs and local councils roles were not clarified and in a way Basotho still believe in their traditional leaders for guidance and developments, generally all concerns are directed to such leaders creating more confusion to constituents. MPs and LDP are still faced with mammoth task of enlightening constituents particularly on committees on lobbying and advocacy which needs other attributes such as persuasion, patience and respect of individuals regardless of their status in a society. Other situation concerned were corruption and favouritism in ruling party supporters while putting their needs instead of considering communities first. Massive understanding was displayed as groups referred to respect of basic human rights and use of constituency office as a leeway to the MP with emphasis on feedback from respective MPs on the subjects such as questions asked to ministers in parliament, engaging in interpellations and attempting to secure necessary resources for the alleviation of such crisis. However, most laws regarding mandated or proper mechanisms stating relations between both local councillors and MPs are still not stipulated in laws hence both decision makers do not feel obliged to work together for community developments and welfare. There is a need to establish and instil coordinating mechanisms to reduce overlapping of roles but to strengthen cooperation and collaboration. Democracy and LDP requested lobby groups to work harmoniously with decision makers with public interest at heart. Cooperation and collaboration with them was encouraged.

The GGO together with the Democracy and Human Rights desk held a series of workshops for the Chiefs and the Councillors with the Makhalaneng Council. The villages were clustered into three areas in order to make the workshop manageable. The main purpose of the workshop was to discuss the Local Government Act of 1997 and the Chieftainship Act of 1968 in the light of them understanding their roles and responsibilities in so far as these Acts are concerned. The workshop further aimed at harmonizing relationships between Chiefs and Councilors as they are the key democracy stakeholders within the society. Moreover, the Chiefs and Councilors are agents of change at the community level and therefore if their working relations are acrimonious, service deliver and development initiatives at the local level would be affected. Finally, the Chiefs and the Councilors were enlightened about the LDP activities in the Makhaleng Constituency and were urged to support the programme. Connecting the Chiefs and the Councilors with LDP activities is a major factor in making the people understand how Parliament functions and how public participation on parliamentary matters can be enhanced in order to deepen democratic principles.

Understanding about the roles and functions of MPs and the generality of how parliament functions and how different publics ought to participate meaningfully in the parliamentary affairs is wanting and it was manifested itself during this workshops. For the Councilors it was noted that they have not yet fulfill much in as far as their mandate is concerned. For instance, the Act requires that each Council should open up a Bank Account in which all monies concerning the operations of the council should be deposited into. This has not happened in the case of Makhalaneng A11 council. The Act further requires Council Secretary (SC) to prepare books of accounts on monthly and annual basis and subsequent to that be caused to audit financial reports by qualified auditor to be appointed by the Minister. But the Makhalanang Council A11 has never been audited ever since Local Government election in 2005 despite the fact the council has always been making financial transactions. The voters are certainly not aware of these clauses of the Act and the worse part of it is that even the Councilors were seemingly not aware of the most crucial provisos of the Act that have a bearing on their day to day conduct.

On the part of the Chiefs, it was noted that the chiefs have not been given any kind of training that would otherwise enhance their knowledge and skills in fulfilling their mandate bearing local government in mind. This workshop was a first of its own kind in the sense that it brought together these two parties who it is needless to say that they need each other in making the local government a reality. It was further noted that some of the chiefs do not know how to read and write as opposed to their counterparts – councilors. In most cases where a Chief does not know how to read and write, the councilor takes an advantage of the situation and as a result unnecessary conflicts prevail. Another aspect which fuels animosity between Chiefs and councilors is the fact that the councilors’ wages almost triples that of Chiefs and therefore inferior complexity plays a centre stage and as a result friction between chiefs and councilors perpetuates.

<<< Back