Abstract
ABSTRACT Lesotho has a bicameral parliamentary system based on the British model. While the National Assembly is clearly a representative House elected by the citizenry, the purpose, structure and legislative powers of the Senate as the Second Chamber have been a matter of considerable controversy throughout the history of parliamentary democracy in the country. The National Assembly generally has the upper hand not only in the legislative process but also in the broader parliamentary system - it chooses the Prime Minister, it places its confidence in the government and it can withdraw such confidence. The fact that the model generally gives the National Assembly the upper hand is a matter of common cause. What is in question, though, is the nature and extent of the limitation of the powers of the Senate in terms of the Constitution. This article investigates this question and contends that the composition of, and restrictions on, the Senate need to be reviewed in order to enable the Chamber to play a meaningful role in Lesotho's parliamentary democracy . Key words: Constitution of Lesotho, Bicameralism, Senate, National Assembly, Powers of the Second Chamber
Highlights
One of the foundational features of Lesotho’s parliamentary design, cast in the British mould,1 is that it is parliamentary.2 As Jennings contends, albeit in the British context, a system is regarded as parliamentary when “....the people are for the time being represented by the House of Commons, subject always to an appeal to the electorate; because, in consequence, the approval of the House of Commons is necessary for the general policy and, frequently, the specific proposals of the Government; and because all other authorities in the State, including the Sovereign and the House of Lords, must give way to a House of Commons that clearly represents the people”.3The Lesotho parliamentary design to all intents and purposes fits this description
While the National Assembly is clearly a representative House elected by the citizenry, the purpose, structure and legislative powers of the Senate as the Second Chamber have been a matter of considerable controversy throughout the history of parliamentary democracy in the country
The forgoing analysis indicates that the development of bicameralism in Lesotho is an artefact of the broader development of institutions of government throughout the various historical epochs of the country
Summary
One of the foundational features of Lesotho’s parliamentary design, cast in the British mould, is that it is parliamentary. As Jennings contends, albeit in the British context, a system is regarded as parliamentary when “....the people are for the time being represented by the House of Commons, subject always to an appeal to the electorate; because, in consequence, the approval of the House of Commons is necessary for the general policy and, frequently, the specific proposals of the Government; and because all other authorities in the State, including the Sovereign and the House of Lords, must give way to a House of Commons that clearly represents the people”.3. The Parliament is organised into two chambers – the National Assembly and the Senate. While bicameralism dates back to the colonial period, its modern incarnation in Lesotho started with the 1966 Constitution.. The predominating chamber, in the parliamentary design in Lesotho is the National Assembly. The Constitution places certain restrictions on the Senate in relation to the legislative process.20 This limitations have been a subject of controversy in Lesotho. The question is whether the Senate powers under the Constitution of Lesotho are only revisionary and dilatory. The third part deals especially with the design and powers of the Senate under the current Constitution of Lesotho. The fourth part discusses the lessons that can be learnt from the United Kingdom
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have