FEW RIGHTS FOR SWAZI WOMEN

Now and again the Swaziland media offer very revealing insights into the true culture of the kingdom.

Unfortunately, the journalists writing the reports often don’t realise just how much they are teaching us about their kingdom.

There was an example of this in the Times of Swaziland on Thursday (31 January 2008). A report told how a 17-year-old girl (described by the Times as a ‘minor’) had been convicted for committing abortion after her lover, a married man, impregnated her and told her to get rid of it. She represented herself in court and was sentenced to a prison term of two years or an E2 000 fine. (In Swaziland about 70 percent of the population have an income of less than E1 per day so E2 000 – 285 US dollars – is a considerable sum).

The Times reported that the girl was reported to the police after the girl’s mother noticed that her ‘five-month-old stomach bulge’ had suddenly disappeared.

What interests me is this exchange of words between the magistrate who tried the case (there are no such thing as jury trials in undemocratic Swaziland) and the girl. According to the Times, the magistrate questioned the girl as to why she had not taken contraceptives measures during her ‘ill-fated fling’ with the married man.

Magistrate – Do you know that there are contraceptives in this world?
Girl – Yes, I know.
Mag – Why did you not use protection when you engaged in sexual activity with this man?
Girl – He refused that we use a condom.
Mag – Why did you not tell him that you would not agree to have sex if he did not use one?
Girl – He grabbed me such that he got his way.
Mag – Oh he forced you? That is rape, did he rape you?
Girl – Eish.. no, You see, we were lovers, he didn’t rape me.
Mag – But still you could have told him no protection no sleeping?
Girl – Like I said, he grabbed me such that I eventually gave in and said yes.

The Times reported that at the time the newspaper went to press ‘she had not paid the fine and was being prepared to be sent to prison’.

The newspaper report leaves the story there, but journalists could have reminded readers that in Swaziland women have few rights. Traditional custom allows that women of any age are ‘minors’ and to all intents and purposes are the property of men, usually their fathers or their husbands.

The magistrate in this case seems not to understand the reality of life in Swaziland. The girl, aged 17, has been coerced into having sex (‘he grabbed me such that he got his way’) with a married man. The age of the man is not given but as a married man he is clearly an adult. Yet the fact that he had sex with the ‘minor’ girl (which could possibly itself be a crime) goes unmentioned. The idea that she could negotiate the use of contraceptives in such circumstances is laughable.

The 17-year-old had no rights in the ‘relationship’ with the man. That is entirely typical of the position women generally have in Swaziland where women are predominately subordinate to men. Their important role is limited to child bearing and making sure that the house and family chores are done.

Women are economically dependent on their husband. A husband has the customary right to use the labour of his wives to till any fields he may keep for his own use. The husband gets to own any surplus produce.

Much of this is done quite legally. The Marriage Act 1964 confers marital power to the husband over property, the capacity of the wife and the property of the wife.

The journalists told us none of this, but I cannot believe they did not know.