Swaziland’s traditional prime minister has called for a Swazi journalist to face serious punishment or even death for writing an article that was ‘disrespectful’ to King Mswati III.
Jim Gama said a report published in a newspaper (it was the Times of Swaziland but he never said this out loud) about the financial cost to the kingdom of holding a three-day ‘people’s parliament’ had been ‘very disrespectful to royalty and the king’.
The Times Sunday reported yesterday (15 June 2008) that Gama told a crowd at the ‘people’s parliament’ that he was disgusted at the way the story was handled.
According to the Times Sunday, Gama said, ‘whoever wrote the report should be punished using “umphini” which in Swazi terms means a serious punishment or even death’.
Gama is the Ludzidzini governor and is recognised in Swaziland as the leader of the traditionalists in the kingdom. His word carries more weight in Swaziland than that of the official Prime Minister, Themba Dlamini.
The Times Sunday reported Gama saying, ‘Your Majesty, you gave them [the media] the freedom to write and with that freedom they are disrespecting you.’
Gama went on to say that the newspapers should have reported that the ‘people’s parliament’ was filled to the brim ‘and that Swazis loved their king instead of writing negative reports’.
The day before publication a reporter from the Times of Swaziland telephoned me to ask for my comment on Gama’s statement. I said that the Swazi press should not let Gama intimidate them and the duty of the media was to support the people of Swaziland and not the ruling elite.
None of this appeared in the paper and who can be surprised when Gama holds the threat of death over the heads of journalists?
The report that so offended Gama appeared in the Times of Swaziland (13 June2008) and said that the cost of the three-day ‘people’s parliament’ would be E15 million (just over 2 million US dollars). The newspaper also reported that people at the parliament said they were fed up with government corruption.
The Times Sunday (15 June 2008) ran an apology saying that the story about the E15 million budget ‘gave the impression that the expenses for the People’s Parliament would cost E15m. This is not the case, and we would like to apologise to all those who might have been misled. The article, however was correct.’
How’s that for a non-apology apology? Do you think there was some arm-twisting going on?
No comments:
Post a Comment