QMMH executives refuse to back down 

…as they escalate PAC showdown to Court of Appeal 

Moorosi Tsiane 

THE standoff between Queen ‘Mamohato Memorial Hospital (QMMH) management and Parliament’s Public Accounts Committee (PAC) is far from over. 

After suffering a major setback in the Constitutional Court last month, QMMH Managing Director, Dr ‘Makhoase Ranyali, and her deputy, Thenjiwe Dlangamandla, have approached the Court of Appeal in a bid to overturn a ruling that cleared the way for Parliament to summon and question them over the hospital’s finances, governance and alleged irregularities. 

The appeal follows a Constitutional Court judgment delivered on 10 June 2026 by Chief Justice Sakoane Sakoane, with Justices Fumane Khabo and Moneuoa Kopo concurring, dismissing the duo’s urgent application to halt the PAC proceedings and invalidate the committee’s actions. 

Dr Ranyali and Ms Dlangamandla were summoned to appear before the PAC in November and December last year to answer questions relating to QMMH’s operations, financial management, employment practices and allegations of politically influenced appointments, including claims that Deputy Managing Director, Moleboheng Tau, had more than doubled her own salary. 

Although the two initially appeared before the committee on 14 November 2025, they failed to honour a subsequent invitation on 28 November after the then Ministry of Health’s Principal Secretary, ‘Maneo Ntene, had been excused from the proceedings. 

The PAC subsequently issued formal summons directing them to appear on 8 and 9 December 2025. 

However, proceedings descended into chaos on 9 December when the two executives walked out of the hearing after objecting to questioning by PAC chairperson, ‘Machabana Lemphane-Letsie. Their departure prompted the committee to issue warrants for their arrest, triggering an urgent Constitutional Court application seeking to stop the arrests and bar Ms Lemphane-Letsie from presiding over the inquiry. 

The hospital executives argued that they had only been summoned to answer questions arising from the Auditor-General’s report but were instead subjected to questioning on unrelated human resources, contractual matters and internal management issues. 

Their lawyer, Advocate Christopher Lephuthing, argued that the PAC had exceeded its constitutional mandate by straying beyond the scope of the Auditor-General’s findings. 

However, the PAC lawyer, Advocate Maletsatsi Kao-Theoha, maintained that the committee had acted squarely within its powers under Standing Order 97(5). 

“It was after the PS asked to be excused that the QMMH management decided not to come as well on 28 November 2025. The PAC therefore decided to issue them with summons and they came on 8 December and the following day they walked out of the session,” Adv Kao-Theoha argued. 

She also rejected allegations that the executives had been harassed. 

“During the proceedings, the applicants were never subjected to any harassment. I submit that PAC did not act beyond its powers when questioning the applicants. The questions that they were asked were relevant issues as they affected the funds that have been allocated to the hospital by the government,” she submitted. 

The Constitutional Court ultimately sided with the respondents and dismissed the application. 

Dissatisfied with that outcome, Dr Ranyali and Ms Dlangamandla have now appealed, arguing that the Constitutional Court fundamentally misinterpreted the law. 

In their notice of appeal, they contend that Chief Justice Sakoane “misconceived the essence of Section 117(4) of the Constitution of Lesotho and Section 27 of the Audit Act, 2016”. 

“Flowing from the above error of judgment, the Court a quo (previous court) erred in dismissing the application as it did and this left PAC at the critical position of carrying on with the illusions in their special report on the leasing of the private healthcare services at Queen ‘Mamohato Memorial Hospital,” they argue. 

The appellants further contend that the Constitutional Court erred in finding that only Parliament has the authority to remove the PAC chairperson. 

“The Court a quo erred in assuming that it is only Parliament that has the capacity to remove the Chairperson of PAC, thus giving Hon. ‘Machabana Letsie-Lemphane leeway to continue to preside over PAC proceedings and harass officers of the government who appear before PAC with her irrelevant personal beliefs or predispositions about imaginary corruption which she has no power to investigate and pronounce herself on,” the notice of appeal states. 

They also challenge the Constitutional Court’s endorsement of the committee’s decision to issue warrants of arrest. 

“In view of the expressly pleaded defence that PAC itself authorised warrants of arrest at variance with the Parliamentary Powers and Privileges Act, 1994, the Court a quo erred in sanitising the irregular conduct of PAC which sought arrests of Appellants under dubious circumstances where there should have been no hesitation or uncertainty that the PAC acted outside the parameters of the law,” they argue. 

The pair further maintain that the PAC improperly expanded its inquiry beyond the matters contained in the summons and the Auditor-General’s report. 

“The Court a quo erred in condoning the conduct of PAC to the extent of indirectly allowing their questions which deviated from the scope set out in the summons in circumstances where a great amount of argument and confusion would have been avoided by looking at the summons against the audit report on the consolidated financial statements for the year ended 31 March 2022,” the grounds of appeal read. 

The post QMMH executives refuse to back down  appeared first on Lesotho Times.