The Swaziland Government
has rejected
a report from a group of internationally respected researchers that found
only seven in one hundred Swazi people were ‘very satisfied’ with the way
democracy works in the kingdom.
Percy Simelane, the
official Government spokesperson, said the research was designed to tarnish the
image of the Swaziland.
King Mswati III rules
Swaziland as sub-Saharan Africa’s last absolute monarch, political parties
cannot take part in elections and groups advocating for multi-party democracy
are banned under the Suppression of Terrorism Act.
Research published by Afrobarometer
showed that 59 percent of the people did not think they could freely express
what they thought. It also showed that about 51 percent of the population doubted
the kingdom embraced the tenets of democracy.
Voice of America (VoA) reported,
‘Spokesman Percy Simelane says it is obvious that the survey was conducted to
tarnish the reputation of the kingdom and not intentioned to help Swazis, who
he says support the monarchical governance as enshrined in the constitution.’
VoA also reported Simelane
saying, ‘Even before the elections, two years ago, the King and the government
allowed the people to say whether or not they still wanted to continue with the
way the constitution says we should. And the people said they still want the
constitution followed to the letter.’
However, no such constitutional
review took place. The Swazi people have not been consulted on the constitution
since it came into force in 2005.
The writing of the constitution
itself was controversial. The International
Bar Association , a group of experienced lawyers, was called in by King
Mswati in 2003 to comment on the first draft of the constitution. It called the
process ‘flawed’ and reported that one critic went so far as to call it a
‘fraud’.
The IBA pointed out that the judiciary and
non-government organisations (NGOs) were not allowed to take part in the
consultation before the constitution was written. Also, individuals were
interviewed in front of their chiefs so were not free to say what they really thought
about the powers of the King and what he and his followers like to call
Swaziland’s ‘unique democracy’, the Tinkhundla system.
IBA said the consultation did not allow for groups
to make submissions and incomplete records were kept of the submissions that
were made so, IBA said, there was no formal record of how Swazi citizens
presented their views and of what in fact they said.
On top of this the IBA reported that the Swaziland
media were not allowed to report on the submissions.
‘Furthermore, information was elicited in a highly charged atmosphere. Individuals were reportedly asked, in the presence of chiefs, whether they wanted to retain the King and whether they preferred political parties,’ IBA said.
‘Furthermore, information was elicited in a highly charged atmosphere. Individuals were reportedly asked, in the presence of chiefs, whether they wanted to retain the King and whether they preferred political parties,’ IBA said.
See also
SWAZILAND
NOT DEMOCRATIC, SAY SWAZIS
SWAZIS
DID NOT CHOOSE POLITICAL SYSTEM
No comments:
Post a Comment