The 2019 report just published scores Swaziland 16 out of a possible total of 100. For political rights it scores seven; for civil liberties it scores six. Each rating is from one to seven, with one representing the greatest degree of freedom and seven the smallest.
Freedom House reported that countries that score seven
for political rights, such as Swaziland, ‘have few or no political rights
because of severe government oppression, sometimes in combination with civil
war. While some are draconian police states, others may lack an authoritative
and functioning central government and suffer from extreme violence or rule by
regional warlords.’
It said countries that score six for civil liberties, as Swaziland does,
‘have very restricted civil liberties. They strongly limit the rights of
expression and association and frequently hold political prisoners. They may
allow a few civil liberties, such as some religious and social freedoms, some
highly restricted private business activity, and some open and free private
discussion.’
Swaziland is ruled by King Mswati III as sub-Saharan Africa’s last
absolute monarch. Political parties are banned from taking part in elections.
The people are only allowed to select 59 members of the House
of Assembly; the King appoints a further 10. None of the 30 members of the
Swazi Senate are elected by the people. Swaziland held an election in September
2018 but although the winners in each constituency have been announced the
numbers of votes cast for each candidate have not been made public.
Freedom House is not the only international
organisation to highlight the lack of human rights in Swaziland. The United
States in its annual
report on the kingdom for 2017 (the most recent available) stated,
‘The most significant human rights issues included: arbitrary interference with
privacy and home; restrictions on freedoms of speech, assembly, and
association; denial of citizens’ ability to choose their government in free and
fair elections; institutional lack of accountability in cases involving rape
and violence against women; criminalization of same-sex sexual conduct,
although rarely enforced; trafficking in persons; restrictions on worker
rights; and child labor.
‘With few exceptions, the government did not prosecute
or administratively punish officials who committed abuses. In general
perpetrators acted with impunity.’
Amnesty
International in a review of Swaziland for 2017 / 2018
stated, ‘Forced evictions continued to be carried out. The Public Order Act and
the Suppression of Terrorism Act (STA) severely limited the rights to freedom
of expression, association and peaceful assembly. A ban on opposition parties
continued. Gender-related violence remained prevalent.’
It added, ‘King Mswati approved the Public Order Act on 8 August, which
curtailed the rights to freedom of assembly and association, imposing
far-reaching restrictions on organizers of public gatherings. The Act also
failed to provide mechanisms to hold law enforcement officials accountable for
using excessive force against protesters or public gatherings.’
Human
Rights Watch in its report on events in Swaziland in 2016
stated Swaziland, ‘continued to repress political dissent and disregard human
rights and rule of law principles in 2016. Political parties remained banned,
as they have been since 1973; the independence of the judiciary is severely
compromised, and repressive laws continued to be used to target critics of the
government and the king despite the 2005 Swaziland Constitution guaranteeing
basic rights.’
See also
Legitimacy and credibility of Swaziland election
hampered by political parties ban, UN group reports
https://swazimedia.blogspot.com/2018/11/legitimacy-and-credibility-of-swaziland.html
Swazi law used against human rights
https://swazimedia.blogspot.com/2018/05/swazi-law-used-against-human-rights.html
Swazi law used against human rights
No comments:
Post a Comment