The Swaziland Federation of Trade Unions (SFTU) wants international labour organizations and civil society groups to force King Mswati III to embrace a democratic change in the kingdom..
Jan Sithole, Secretary General of SFTU, said Swazi people wanted a multi party system of government in Swaziland.
At present King Mswati is the last remaining absolute monarch in sub-Saharan Africa, political parties are banned in Swaziland, the parliament has no real powers and the king makes all the important decisions.
Sithole said the labour organizations were committed to negotiating change through social dialogue and called on the international community to apply targeted sanctions against Swazi government officials and the kingdom’s royal family and others in the ruling elite in Swaziland.
The sanctions should include a freeze of accounts, denial of flying into many capitals of the world and use of peer pressure among others.
Speaking at a press conference in Accra yesterday (15 May 2009), Sithole said workers would proceed with protests and continuous mass mobilisation to pressure government for democratic change and to adhere to all ratified conventions.
Sithole said, ‘We want the monarchy to be constitutional that will reign and not rule. Indeed culture and tradition must not be used as tools of abuse, manipulation and self aggrandisement.’
At independence in 1968, the constitution allowed the king, culture and tradition to co-exist with political parties. The king then was a constitutional monarch while the ruling party runs the government.
Five years later, the then king, Sobhuza II, declared a state of emergency and banned political parties and workers’ right to assemble without prior permission. He also vested all powers of governance in the king.
Sithole said in the 35 years since the king’s proclamation, the king had being appointing the prime minister, the cabinet and envoys and now controlled about 66 percent of appointments in the Senate and 20 percent in the Assembly.
He said while the Swazi government had signed every international human rights-friendly treaty, it had not implemented any of them. Instead, the government had passed laws that would allow it to circumvent the treaties.
No comments:
Post a Comment