Swaziland’s Deputy Prime Minister Themba Masuku has claimed that human rights and democratic principles are adhered to in the kingdom in a newspaper interview that denies evidence to the contrary amassed over several years.
He told the South African Sunday Independent this week (27 July 2013) that Swaziland adhered
to 29 international and regional protocols, charters and conventions, the
majority of which addressed basic human rights.
This flies in the face of evidence supplied by human
rights observers.
In 2011, the US State Department reporting on human rights in Swaziland, said, ‘The three main human rights abuses were police use
of excessive force, including use of torture and beatings; a breakdown of the
judiciary system and judicial independence; and discrimination and abuse of
women and children.
‘Other significant human rights problems included
extrajudicial killings by security forces; arbitrary arrests and lengthy
pretrial detention; arbitrary interference with privacy and home; restrictions
on freedom of speech, assembly, and association; prohibitions on political
activity and harassment of political activists; trafficking in persons;
societal discrimination against members of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and
transgender (LGBT) community; harassment of labor leaders; restrictions on
worker rights; child labor; and mob violence.
‘In general, perpetrators acted with impunity, and the
government took few or no steps to prosecute or punish officials who committed
abuses.’
It is also clear that in Swaziland, King
Mswati who is sub-Saharan Africa’s last absolute monarch, is in complete
control.
In October 2012, the kingdom’s House of Assembly passed avote of no-confidence in the government by a three-fifths majority. According
to the constitution King Mswati was required (he had no discretion in the
matter) to sack the Prime Minister and Government.
This he did not do, instead the king put pressure on
members of parliament to run the no-confidence vote again, this time ensuring
it did not pass. In this way King Mswati ensured that the government he himself
handpicked stayed in power.
On this subject the Sunday
Independent quoted Masuku saying, ‘Our constitution contains a Bill of
Rights. Recently some members of parliament used parts of it to push a no
confidence vote on cabinet. That is democracy at play. The government did not
thwart the process. It’s just that the process was flawed.’
Masuku told the newspaper that child rights legislation in
Swaziland was world-class. This came two weeks after Timothy Velabo (TV) Mtetwa,
one of the leading traditionalists among the king’s supporters and who is
commonly known as the ‘traditional prime minister’ said it was all right for children
to be taken as brides.
He said this despite a newly-enacted Children’s Protection and Welfare Act, 2012, that aims to make the practice known as kwendzisa
illegal.
Mtetwa was quoted by a local newspaper saying
traditionalists would apply for a review of the Act if it was felt to collide
with Swazi customs and traditions.
Masuku seems to be on a charm offensive on behalf of the
Swazi ruling elite in an attempt to convince international opinion that
Swaziland is a fully-fledged democracy.
This year national elections are to be held, on a date
yet to be set by the king, and already international democracy watchers have concluded
that they will be a fraud.
The parliament has no powers, as evidenced by the king’s
refusal to abide by the constitution and sack the government after the vote of
no confidence.
The king selects the Prime Minister in contravention of
the constitution which insists that the PM should be a member of the kingdom’s
senate. There are two chambers of parliament, the House of Assembly and the
Senate. Of the 65 members of the House, 10 are chosen by King Mswati and 55 are
elected by the people. In the Senate, King Mswati chooses 20 of the 30 places.
The other 10 are chosen by members of the House of Assembly. None are elected
by the people.
At the last Swaziland national election in 2008, the
Commonwealth Election Team, which has global experience monitoring national
elections, declared that the voting was so badly flawed Swaziland needed to
rewrite its constitution, if it ever wanted to ‘ensure that Swaziland’s
commitment to political pluralism is unequivocal’.
The European Union declined even to send a delegation to
monitor the election, declaring that it could not be free and fair if political
parties were banned. In 2008 Peter Beck Christiansen, the EU Ambassador to
Swaziland, told a press conference there were ‘shortcomings in the kingdom’s
democracy’.
In his interview with the Sunday Independent, Masuku claimed that the pro-democracy protests
that have been taking place across Swaziland over recent years had been
hijacked by ‘criminals’.
He said, ‘Such clashes happen all over the world. We don’t
condone it, but some protest actions are hijacked by criminals.’
But if anyone is behaving like ‘criminals’ it is the
Swazi state. In its annual report on
Swaziland for 2012, Amnesty International said, ‘Arbitrary and secret
detentions, political prosecutions and excessive force were used to crush
political protests.’
It also reported, ‘Arbitrary and secret detentions,
unlawful house arrests and other state of emergency-style measures were used to
crush peaceful anti-government protests over several days [in 2011].’
See also
SWAZI ELECTION ‘WILL BE A FRAUD’
SWAZILAND’S BRUTAL REGIME – AMNESTY
KING PROVES CONSTITUTION IS WORTHLESS
No comments:
Post a Comment