| Lesotho / Lesotho |
|
Country facts
| Lesotho | |
| Date of accession to the APRM | July 2004 |
| Review status | 1st review completed |
| Country Review Report publication date | June 2010 |
| NPoA status | N/A |
Faits de Pays
| Lesotho | |
| Date d'accession au MAEP | Juillet 2004 |
| Statut de l’évaluation | 1ère évaluation achevée |
| Date de publication du Rapport d’évaluation national | Juin 2010 |
| Statut du PAN | S.O |
Displaying items by tag: Lesotho
This is the APRM Country Review Report Summary for the Kingdom of Lesotho
The greatest challenges to good governance in Africa lie at the intersection of two problems: (i) low horizontal and vertical accountability, and (ii) weak constitutionalism. While courts are a critical player at these intersecting fault lines, the role of the judiciary has frequently been understated or marginalised in the African Peer Review Mechanism (APRM) This paper seeks to identify gaps between, and within, the APRM CSARs and CRRs as they relate to judicial independence, protection of rights and separation of powers. The APRM findings from Uganda, Lesotho and Tanzania are analysed in relation to existing knowledge and literature on judicial independence. Ways in which the APRM questionnaire and assessment could be adjusted to broaden analysis and understanding of judicial independence and power are also outlined. (by Rachel Ellett) pdf View file (214.85 kB)
This is the final APRM report for the Kingdom of Lesotho (by APRM Secretariat)
What has changed in Lesotho’s governance since it underwent the African Peer Review Mechanism (APRM) country review in 2009? To answer this question, the APRM Monitoring Project (AMP) – run jointly by the South African Institute of International Affairs (SAIIA), the Centre for Policy Studies (CPS) and the Africa Governance, Monitoring and Advocacy Project (AfriMAP) - presents “Implementing the APRM: Views from Civil Society - The Lesotho Report.” This report represents the views of researchers and civil society organisations that have analysed the country’s APRM profile and tracked the implementation of its National Programme of Action (NPoA). The report finds that although some progress has been achieved, results have been mixed and the APRM has not been streamlined into the country’s planning processe. (by SAIIA, AFRIMAP)