An explosive diplomatic row has erupted between SA and Lesotho over the appointment of the head of Lesotho Highlands Development Authority, throwing the future of the critical water project between the two nations into uncertainty.
The Lesotho Highlands Development Authority, responsible for delivery of water from Lesotho to SA under a 1986 treaty, reappointed Tente Tente, a Lesotho citizen, as its CEO on October 1, handing him another term to continue overseeing the multibillion-rand construction second phase of the project, which includes building the Polihali Dam and tunnel to funnel water to SA and generate hydropower for Lesotho.
Lesotho, however, declared the move illegal, arguing that the Lesotho Highlands Development Authority board bypassed consultation with the Lesotho Highlands Water Commission, which includes delegates from both countries and is supposed to oversee the Lesotho Highlands Development Authority and the entire water project.
The fallout could further delay phase two, which is already behind schedule and is grappling with a R15bn budget overrun. The initial budget of R37bn has now ballooned to R53bn due to delays, according to the Lesotho government.
Lesotho alleges that Tente caused both the delay and the cost escalation during his first tenure from 2019 to September this year.
SA said solely blaming Tente was unfair because the project environment, political dynamics and governance structures did not support his success. The stalemate has triggered a legal battle that could further damage the already fraught relations between the two countries.
Lesotho attorney-general Rapelang Motsieloa, and natural resources minister Mohlomi Moleko have filed an urgent high court application to reverse Tente’s appointment. They are suing Tente and the Lesotho Highlands Development Authority board. Pretoria sprang into action to lobby senior Lesotho government officials to help find a quiet political solution.
Court papers, letters and other documents seen by Business Day reveal how Tente’s appointment caused divisions at all senior levels of the project’s management. The Lesotho Highlands Development Authority board split, and the Lesotho Highlands Water Commission delegates from Lesotho and SA are at odds. Even the ministers in charge, Moleko and SA’s Pemmy Majodina, have yet to find common ground.
Moleko’s court filings and other documents paint a damning picture of Tente’s performance, citing evaluation scores that place him in a “lower spectrum of average performers”.
Tente was reappointed despite “significant deficiencies” and “chronic underperformance”, which contributed to the project delays, said Moleko, whose application is to have Tente’s reappointment reversed. He also wants Tente removed as the ex officio member of the Lesotho Highlands Development Authority board.
Tente, the minister claimed, was reappointed “in circumstances which can be summed up as nullity and having no legal consequences and effect”.
He cited the Lesotho Highlands Development Authority Amendment 2000, which states that the authority’s board “shall, in consultation with the commission, determine the terms and conditions of service of the chief executive”.
I must add that the delay has far-reaching implications on Lesotho in that Lesotho would forfeit the hydropower generation as this is dependent on additional water transfer.
— Mohlomi Moleko
Moleko interpreted this section to mean the board made the appointment with the commission’s approval. He told the court that apart from the illegality, the board reappointed Tente “despite evident fundamental deficiencies in management and leadership. The board acknowledged its failure to address the pre-identified shortcomings and affirmed the current ongoing existence of such inadequacies”.
The minister pointed to a September 2024 report, which revealed that “there were risks on major works of the project, and all major works had fallen behind schedule by more than 12 months”. He noted that the delays came “with serious consequences, including claims from consultants and contractors amounting to millions” to be paid by the two governments.
SA, he warned, would not receive water at the expected time “and this would sour relationships between the parties, including financial penalties”. He said Lesotho would not get water royalties on time, “thus affecting economic growth and stifling development”.
“I must add that the delay has far-reaching implications on Lesotho in that Lesotho would forfeit the hydropower generation as this is dependent on additional water transfer. This is not only about royalties, it is also about losing the hydropower generation, which is crucial for Lesotho and the people of Lesotho,” Moleko said.
Moleko’s arguments are based on a legal opinion he received from the attorney-general in September, days before Tente’s reappointment.
SA is, however, standing with Tente and has made this position clear to the government in Majodina’s letter to Moleko in September and a position paper submitted to the Lesotho Highlands Water Commission during debates.
In a letter to Moleko, Majodina said SA had reviewed the board’s process to reappoint and concluded that it was above board and in line with the Lesotho Highlands Water Commission’s prescripts. “Furthermore, SA is of the view that at this stage in the implementation of the Lesotho Highlands Water Project phase two, owing to the complexity of the project, it would not be advisable to appoint a new CEO,” she said.
SA reiterated the position in other documents. In the “position paper”, SA described as arguable the Lesotho government’s use of “absolute adjectives” such as “significant deficiencies” and “chronic underperformance” to spotlight Tente’s initial tenure.
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.