Swaziland’s High Court has sent a chilling
warning to journalists in the kingdom that the law courts can determine what
they are permitted to write and what they are not.
High Court Judge Mpendulo Simelane
ruled that Section 24 of Swaziland’s Constitution that includes guarantees
of freedom of expression and freedom of the press can be overridden by judges.
In a ruling in which he convicted a magazine
editor and a writer of contempt of court, Judge Simelane said, ‘No one has the
right to attack a judge or the Courts under the disguise of the right of
freedom of expression.’ He said this was ‘because it is in the public interest
that the authority and dignity of the Court is maintained’.
Bheki Makhubu and Thulani Maseko had written
and published articles in the Nation,
a monthly magazine in Swaziland, that were critical of the Swazi judiciary in general
and Chief Justice Michael Ramodibedi in particular.
The pair are awaiting
sentence on a date yet to be set.
In his judgment,
Judge Simelane said, ‘The rule of law is meant to benefit everyone. Some journalists have this misconception that
just because they have the power of the pen and paper they can say or write
anything under the disguise of freedom of expression.’
The judge’s ruling has been criticized across
the world. Amnesty
International said, ‘Their detention and trial violate their right to
exercise freedom of expression as guaranteed under Swaziland's domestic and
international human rights obligations.’
The International
Commission of Journalists said, ‘The right of freedom of expression is a
right which is foundational to free societies.
‘Its respect is recognized as a necessary
condition for the realization of transparency and accountability that are
essential for the promotion, protection and realization of human rights.
‘It includes the right to impart information
to others in almost any form. It covers both facts and opinions.’
Committee
to Protect Journalists Africa Program Coordinator Sue Valentine called the
ruling, ‘an indictment of the thin-skinned Swazi judiciary that serves a
monarch and denies citizens the basic right of freedom of expression’.
Santiago
A. Canton, Executive Director of Robert F. Kennedy Partners for Human Rights
said, ‘A judicial system that is ready to deny freedom of expression to shield
itself from criticism cannot legitimately claim to be administering justice”,
and added, ‘Public officials, such as judges and magistrates, by the very
nature of their position should be freely scrutinized by the population.’
Action for Southern Africa (ACTSA) Campaigns
Manager Mark Beacon said, ‘This was a highly politicised trial and yet another
example of how the Swazi regime uses the judicial system to crush anyone who
dares to criticise them.’
Cléa Kahn-Sriber, head of the Reporters
Without Borders Africa desk, said, ‘This is clearly a political verdict
designed to gag Swaziland’s only independent publication. It will also send a
chilling message to all other Swazi journalists.’
Innocent Maphalala, editor of the Times Sunday, a newspaper in Swaziland,
where nearly all broadcast media are state-controlled and one of the kingdom’s only
two newspaper groups is in effect owned by King Mswati III, called
the court ruling, ‘a sad day for Swazi journalists’.
Dr. Maxwell Mthembu, a journalism and mass
communication lecturer at the University of Swaziland (UNISWA) told local media
the judgment suppressed media freedom ‘at a time when the media has already
been turned into a lap dog’.
The Observer Sunday quoted him saying, ‘The
judgment is oblivious of the fact that the media has to monitor and keep check
of the three arms of government. It concludes that the judiciary is beyond
reproach. That is not proper because the media has to ensure those checks,’
He added, ‘This is really bad for the media
because it breeds censorship. What this judgment means is that the media can no
longer touch the judiciary.’
See also
WHAT CONVICTED JOURNALISTS
WROTE
COURT CONVICTS EDITOR AND WRITER
EDITOR AND LAWYER ‘FACE 10 YEARS JAIL’
No comments:
Post a Comment