The Suppression of Terrorism Act 2008 (STA) and the Sedition and Subversive Activities Act 1938 (SSAA) were on trial in the kingdom ruled by King Mswati III, sub-Saharan Africa’s last absolute monarch.
The two acts have been extensively used by King
Mswati and the Swazi Government that he handpicks to stifle opposition to the
regime. In particular it targets individuals and groups who advocate for
multi-party democracy.
Political parties are not allowed to contest
elections and parties and groups that advocate for democracy are banned under
the STA.
The Swaziland High Court began a two-day hearing on
Tuesday (8 September 2015). On the second day the case was adjourned because
there was not enough time to hear the case fully. It has been rescheduled for 8
and 9 October 2015.
Advocates
against the two acts are arguing that they are
unconstitutional as they infringe the right to free expression. They say the
definitions of ‘terrorism’ and ‘sedition’ are too vague and can be applied at
times when people have legitimate rights to speak or act.
The Southern Africa Litigation Centre, which monitored
the court hearing said, ‘This hearing was a consolidation
of four separate cases – each of which involved criminal charges in terms of
these laws which had been brought against activists who had expressed opinions
against the Swazi governmental system. What characterized the activities that
led to these charges was that they were all peaceful.’
The case is highlighting Mario Masuku, President of
the People’s United Democratic Movement (PUDEMO) and Maxwell Dlamini, Secretary
General of PUDEMO’s youth wing, SWAYOCO. They were arrested
and charged with sedition, subversion and terrorism
after participating at a May Day celebration in 2014. They were accused of
supporting PUDEMO, which had been banned under the STA. They were in pre-trial
detention for nearly 15 months, before the Supreme Court released
them on bail in July 2015.
Ahead of the court hearing, Jeffrey Smith of Robert F. Kennedy Human Rights,
who is a close observer of Swaziland, wrote,
‘To be
sure, Swaziland is not the peaceful, bucolic backwater that its authorities
wish to present to the world. Like many architects of repressive regimes the
world over, Swaziland’s King Mswati III — in power since 1986 — banks on the
presumption that the world will not notice, or make a fuss about, the
widespread human rights abuses taking place under his direction – not to
mention his notoriously profligate and wasteful
spending, while nearly 50 percent of his subjects live in chronic poverty.
‘The overall situation is so toxic that Swaziland recently became one of
only three countries — which have not undergone a military coup — to have their
African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA) eligibility revoked due to
unresolved human rights concerns. The other two
countries are The
Gambia and South Sudan– not exactly the best of company.
‘King Mswati has, over the years, increasingly and brazenly clamped down
on human rights in Swaziland, conveniently capitalizing on a state of emergency
that was first declared in 1973 by his father, King Sobhuza II. In effect to
this day, the state of emergency banned public protests and political parties,
later deeming the main opposition movement a “terrorist organization,” a
pretext that has been repeatedly used to harass, intimidate and imprison
outspoken critics and would-be challengers to royal authority. Indeed, despite
Swaziland’s outward veneer as a peaceful enclave of “traditional
African values,” the kingdom is home to a widespread culture
of fear that pervades every conceivable facet of society.’
See also
SCRAP
SWAZI TERROR ACT – AMNESTY
No comments:
Post a Comment