Poor child maintenance has become prevalent in Lesotho, such that child maintenance orders have become toothless bulldogs. Children’s court in its capacity has been awarding countless maintenance orders which are unfortunately not being honored and bring those in violation of the law to account is a challenge. Who is failing the best interest of a child? Is it the lawmakers, the courts or law enforcement officers?
Children’s court was instituted to protect the welfare of a child. This encompasses the maintenance of a child regardless of whether the parents live together or are separated. However, an alarming number of parents in Lesotho choose to defy maintenance orders.
“Children’s court has no law,” said Honorable Motebele, a residing magistrate at Children’s court Maseru. The issue of child maintenance is distressing. This is evident in the way cases of maintenance are being handled. White collar cases are easier to resolve, because if the accused individual evades an order to maintain a child, a Garnishee can be served to their employer as a means of enforcing maintenance.
To support this, Inspector Thabiso Molefi an official in the Lesotho Mounted Police Service Human Resource office, pointed out that in cases involving a member of the police, defense force or civil servants; once a court order is issued, the human resource department has the authority to see to it that maintenance is paid. He further brought about the fact that, failure to honor the court order by the accused person gives the plaintiff the right to attain a Garnishee order.
However, this is not the luxury afforded to every Mosotho who find themselves in a child maintenance fray. In instances of self-employed persons, the execution of maintenance orders has proven to be knotty. The Garnishee order is pointless, as there is no employer to interpose in the matter. This also leaves the court unable to determine the worth of the business in question, since there are no means of investigating the matter.
The Child and Gender Protection Unit of the LMPS pointed out that it does not interfere in any maintenance disputes because maintenance in their opinion is a civil affair. The unit claims that there are no proper structures in law enforcement that allow it to interfere in maintenance matters. As such, issuing a child maintenance court order leaves the hands of the CGPU tied hence futile. Shockingly, the element of contempt does not encourage the unit to interpose in such cases. It is evident that there are no laws regulating contempt as a crime in maintenance cases.
An approach to the Director of Research at the Commission of Law Reform brought to light that amendments have been made to the Child Protection and welfare Act of 2011, but they are yet to be passed by parliament. She further pointed out that none of the amendments made touched on the issue of child maintenance.
The Chief of Legal at the Ministry of Social Development said that ineffective child maintenance orders are an administrative affair. Stating that the issue is neither a concern of the statutory nor common law.
In essence, the issue of child maintenance and contempt seem to have taken a back bench in the offices of stakeholders. Which still leaves the question hanging, who is failing the best interest of the child? No one wants to take responsibility or have a clear view of how child maintenance should be constituted by the Legislation, Judiciary and Executive bodies of this country.
This is an outcry Child Advocacy Center Lesotho endeavors to resolve. The non-profit making organization advocates for the primary needs of a child and maintenance is one of the agendas. The organization seeks to reinstate a deserving future to children who have fallen victim to the incompetence of child maintenance orders.
In all honesty, the ideology of child bearing should be a double edged sword. If one is able to consent to unprotected sex and bear a child, they should also bear the responsibilities that come with it.