As Swaziland gears up for the next national election due in 2018
the Elections and Boundaries Commission which is King Mswati III’s propaganda
machine is working at full throttle to mislead people inside and outside the
kingdom that the vote will be credible.
Top of the propagandists’ agenda is to try to fool people
that the election is to choose
a new government. It
is not.
The elections have no real purpose other than to give King
Mswati, who rules Swaziland as sub-Saharan Africa’s last absolute monarch, a
fig leaf of democracy.
Here are 10 reasons
why the election in Swaziland should not be considered credible.
Political parties
are banned from taking part in the election so no debate is possible about
alternative policies to those pursued by the outgoing government.
The election is only for 55 of the 65-member House of
Assembly. The other ten members
are appointed by King Mswati III. No members of the 30-strong Swaziland Senate
are elected; 20 are appointed by the King and 10 are selected by the House of
Assembly.
The
people do not elect a government. The Prime Minister and Cabinet ministers
are appointed by the King. The present PM Barnabas Dlamini has never been
elected to political office.
The Swazi Parliament
has no powers. King Mswati can, and does, overrule decisions he does not like.
This was the case in October 2012 when the king refused to accept a vote of no confidence passed by the House of Assembly on his
government, even though he was obliged by the constitution to do so.
Nominations for the primary elections at the last election
in 2013 were marred by allegations of interference by local chiefs, who report
directly to the King and vet candidates who are nominated. Some candidates
said they were not nominated as they failed to
catch their chief’s eye. Some
women were barred by chiefs from taking part in the 2013 nomination process because
they were wearing trousers.
The Institute for
Security Studies (ISS) summed up the political system in Swaziland in a 2012 ‘situation report’, ‘Tinkhundla elections can essentially be
defined as “organised certainty”, since they reproduce the prevailing political
status quo in Swaziland. The ruling regime enjoys an unchallenged monopoly over
state resources, and elections have increasingly become arenas for competition
over patronage and not policy.’
Candidates in the primary
election are barred by law from campaigning, so voters have no way of
questioning and challenging candidates about what they would do if elected.
The Elections and
Boundaries Commission (EBC) received many complaints following the 2013 primary election. These include the buying of votes; polling stations either open for too many hours (or not enough) and people being turned away from polling stations.
The 2013 elections
were criticised by most international observers.
They failed to meet most of the Southern Africa Development Community (SADC)
principles for conducting democratic elections. The African Union’s (AU)
Election Observation Mission said that Swaziland should change its constitution
so that it conforms with international principles for free and fair elections.
In
2013, the Commonwealth
Observer Mission
noted the presence of police at polling stations, compromised privacy in
polling booths and identifying factors on ballot papers that prevented
anonymity. The Mission recommended that the constitution should be revisited,
ideally “through a fully inclusive, consultative process with all Swazi
political organisations and civil society to harmonise provisions which are in
conflict … to ensure that Swaziland’s commitment to political pluralism is
unequivocal’”.
Richard Rooney
See also
PEOPLE CANNOT ELECT GOVERNMENT
2013
POLL RESULTS STILL NOT KNOWN
KING’S BOGUS CLAIM ON DEMOCRACY
THE CASE FOR POLITICAL PARTIES
POLL OBSERVERS: REWRITE CONSTITUTION
SWAZI KING’S CHIEFS ABOVE ELECTED MPs
NOW, ELECTION MEETINGS ARE ‘SEDITIOUS’
SWAZI ELECTION ‘WILL BE A FRAUD’
‘VOTE BUYING AT SWAZI ELECTION’
EU TELLS KING: FREE PARTIES
POLICE BREAK UP ELECTION MEETING
CALL TO BOYCOTT ELECTION GROWS
POWER STAYS WITH KING – WORLD MEDIA
No comments:
Post a Comment