The constitutional implications of pension deductions under the Pension Funds Act of Lesotho: A comparative analysis

Mtendeweka Mhango, K. Mosito
{"title":"The constitutional implications of pension deductions under the Pension Funds Act of Lesotho: A comparative analysis","authors":"Mtendeweka Mhango, K. Mosito","doi":"10.17159/2077-4907/2023/ldd.v27.7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This article discusses the constitutional implications of pension deductions in the kingdoms of Eswatini and Lesotho. The article is based on a constitutional problem that arose in Government of Eswatini v Mhlanga, where the Supreme Court declared section 32(2) of the Retirement Funds Act 2005 unconstitutional on the grounds that it conflicted with the Constitution. Two decisions in the case - a majority and a minority decision - will be discussed for the purposes of applying them to Lesotho. The article considers comparative questions, including whether the newly enacted section 33(d) of Lesotho's Pension Funds Act 5 of 2019 potentially offends the Constitution of Lesotho in the same way as the majority judgment found in Mhlanga. The article recommends that, when called upon, the judiciary in Lesotho should interpret section 33(d) of the Pension Funds Act in line with the minority judgment in Mhlanga.","PeriodicalId":341103,"journal":{"name":"Law, Democracy and Development","volume":"19 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Law, Democracy and Development","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17159/2077-4907/2023/ldd.v27.7","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This article discusses the constitutional implications of pension deductions in the kingdoms of Eswatini and Lesotho. The article is based on a constitutional problem that arose in Government of Eswatini v Mhlanga, where the Supreme Court declared section 32(2) of the Retirement Funds Act 2005 unconstitutional on the grounds that it conflicted with the Constitution. Two decisions in the case - a majority and a minority decision - will be discussed for the purposes of applying them to Lesotho. The article considers comparative questions, including whether the newly enacted section 33(d) of Lesotho's Pension Funds Act 5 of 2019 potentially offends the Constitution of Lesotho in the same way as the majority judgment found in Mhlanga. The article recommends that, when called upon, the judiciary in Lesotho should interpret section 33(d) of the Pension Funds Act in line with the minority judgment in Mhlanga.
根据莱索托养恤基金法扣减养恤金所涉宪法问题:比较分析
本文讨论了在斯瓦蒂尼和莱索托王国养老金扣除的宪法影响。这篇文章基于Eswatini诉Mhlanga政府案中的宪法问题,最高法院宣布2005年退休基金法第32(2)条违宪,理由是它与宪法相冲突。将讨论该案的两项决定- -多数决定和少数决定- -以便将其适用于莱索托。本文考虑了一些比较问题,包括新颁布的《2019年莱索托第5号养老基金法》第33(d)条是否与姆兰加案的多数判决一样,可能违反莱索托宪法。该条建议,在接到要求时,莱索托司法机关应根据姆兰加案中少数人的判决来解释《养恤基金法》第33(d)条。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信