UK TO PROBE SWAZILAND HUMAN RIGHTS

The UK Government is to investigate human rights violations in Swaziland / Eswatini.
 

This comes after a meeting between Foreign and Commonwealth Office (FCO) officials and human rights organisations.

The Swaziland News website reported the Swaziland Human Rights Network raised issues about Swaziland’s violation of international charters. Activists want the kingdom ruled by King Mswati III as sub-Saharan Africa’s last absolute monarch referred to the Commonwealth Ministerial Action Group which deals with persistent and serious violators of the Commonwealth’s shared principles.

A national election is due later in 2018 but political parties are banned from taking part. Pro-democracy groups are branded ‘terrorists’ under the Suppression of Terrorism Act.

Although the UK has previously given little practical help to assist change in Swaziland it has highlighted that the kingdom is not a democracy. In a report in 2013, the FCO stated that although there was a parliament, ‘there is no effective democracy’.  

It added, ‘The King has the power summarily to appoint and dismiss ministers, all parliamentary candidates require the approval of their chief (who is dependent on the monarch for wealth and power) and while political parties are not forbidden, they are banned from participating in elections.  All candidates must run as independents.’

The FCO called on Swaziland to allow multi-party elections, but this was rejected by the Swazi government.

The report added, ‘Swaziland continues to suffer from a range of governance problems which adversely impact human rights and inhibit the country’s social and economic development and its ability to attract much-needed foreign investment.  The judicial system has suffered repeated crises; the Suppression of Terrorism Act has been used to prevent legitimate expression of political views; peaceful protests have been disrupted and in some cases excessive force used against protesters.  The absence of clearly documented land rights has prevented small farmers from developing their land.  Efforts to amend Swaziland’s laws to prevent domestic violence and to improve the legal status of women have made little progress.’

Human rights violations in Swaziland have also been highlighted by the United States. In its annual report on the kingdom for 2017 it 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.’

See also

SWAZILAND REPRESSES POLITICAL DISSENT

https://swazimedia.blogspot.com/2018/01/swaziland-represses-political-dissent.html

SWAZILAND CIVIL LIBERTIES WORSEN

https://swazimedia.blogspot.co.uk/2018/01/swaziland-civil-liberties-worsen.html

UN PROBES SWAZILAND ON HUMAN RIGHTS

https://swazimedia.blogspot.co.uk/2017/04/un-probes-swaziland-on-human-rights.html

SWAZILAND FAILS HUMAN RIGHTS TEST

https://swazimedia.blogspot.co.uk/2017/11/swaziland-fails-human-rights-test.html

SWAZI TERROR ACT STOPS FREE SPEECH

The Swaziland regime regularly uses the Suppression of Terrorism Act (STA) to stop free speech in the kingdom, the Commonwealth has been told ahead of its heads of government meeting.

The STA is ‘regularly used’ by the police to interfere in trade union activities, Action for Southern Africa (ACTSA) said in a submission to the Commonwealth Ministerial Action Group (CMAG), ahead of the meeting in Malta on 27-29 November 2015.

It said King Mswati III, who rules Swaziland as sub-Saharan Africa’s last absolute monarch, ‘must be held to account for its serious breaches of the Commonwealth Charter’.

In its submission, ACTSA, which is the successor to the Anti-Apartheid Movement, said, ‘A cornerstone of any State seeking to demonstrate its dedication to human rights is the ability of its citizens to exercise freedom of speech. In Swaziland, freedom of speech is denied.’

It added, ‘A key instrument used to curtail freedom of expression in Swaziland is the STA. The STA has been widely criticised since its enactment because of its vague definitions and broad designation of ministerial power as well as its inconsistencies with Swaziland’s own constitution and Swaziland’s obligations under international and regional human rights law. This includes condemnation by the International Bar Association and Amnesty International.

ACTSA added, ‘The STA is regularly used by the police to legitimise interference with trade union activities. For instance during the 2014 May Day celebrations organised by the Trade Union Congress of Swaziland (TUCOSWA), Mario Masuko, President of PUDEMO, and Maxwell Dlamini, Secretary General of the Swaziland Youth Congress, were arrested and charged under the STA after delivering speeches in which they questioned the socio-economic governance of the country. The charges brought against them meant that if they were found guilty, they would have faced a sentence of up to 15 years of hard labour. 

‘Over a year passed with both men in detention and with no verdict having been passed. Finally, on 14 July 2015, the two men were released on bail, with conditions forbidding them from addressing public rallies. Whilst no longer incarcerated, the charges against both men have not been dropped.

‘Additionally, on 17 and 18 March 2014, charges of criminal contempt were brought against human rights lawyer Thulani Maseko and editor in chief of the Nation, Bheki Makhubu. Both men were charged following publication of articles in the Nation that questioned the reasoning behind and circumstances of a case before the High Court of Swaziland. The state action taken against them was subject to condemnation by UN experts in June 2014. The Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) reported concerns that the detention of both men was related to the legitimate exercise of their right to freedom of expression as recognised in the Constitution of the Kingdom of Swaziland. 

‘The OHCHR stated that it was of the view that the detention and trial of Maseko and Makhubu for the exercise of their right to express an opinion on the court case was counter to Swaziland’s international human rights obligations. The two men were subsequently sentenced to two years in prison without benefit or bail where the usual sentence is 30 days. 

‘Following much international condemnation and the dismissal of the judge who had imprisoned them, Bheki Makhubu was finally released on 30 June 2015 having spent 447 days in prison, the prosecution having decided not to oppose his appeal against conviction. The prosecution adopted a similar approach in the case of Thulani Maseko who was also released in July of this year.

‘The use of oppressive laws to limit freedom of speech is not limited simply to the use of existing legislation; there are also instances of unhelpful commentary by government officials that is indicative of the repressive nature of the Swazi State. For example, in August 2014, Sibusiso Barnabas Dlamini, the Swazi prime minister, made a speech in Parliament in which he publically threatened Sipho Gumedze from Lawyers for Human Rights and Vincent Ncongwane, the General Secretary of TUCOSWA, by suggesting that members of their constituency “must strangle them.”

‘These comments were made following their attendance at the US-Africa Leaders’ Summit in Washington DC.

‘These actions are in contrast to the Charter that commits the Commonwealth to ‘peaceful open dialogue and the free flow of information … through a free and responsible media… to enhance democratic traditions and strengthening the democratic processes’.

‘The Commonwealth Observer mission in 2013 heard testimony that a number of journalists critical of the government had lost their jobs, faced legal action or jail, with the consequence that the practice of self-censorship had grown amongst reporters. The media are Swaziland is overwhelming controlled by the state, and thus, ultimately, by the king. 

‘The repeated arrests of the editor of one of the very few independent publications that has been critical of the state and its institutions is clearly intended to intimidate those who would seek to challenge the current regime.

‘The recommendation made by the Commonwealth Observer mission urging the Government of Swaziland to encourage and facilitate private media has apparently failed to inspire action. Instead, efforts to intimidate and restrict the media in fulfilling its legitimate role are ongoing. 

‘Beyond this, the much-criticised STA is being used to suppress political dialogue and thus scupper democratic processes. We believe that CMAG must not be a bystander whilst there are ongoing, serious and persistent violations of fundamental Commonwealth values.’

 

See also

KING ATTACKED OVER HUMAN RIGHTS

http://swazimedia.blogspot.com/2015/11/king-attacked-over-human-rights.html

 

SWAZI TERROR ACT TRIAL PUT ON HOLD

http://swazimedia.blogspot.com/2015/09/swazi-terror-act-trial-put-on-hold.html

 

SCRAP SWAZI TERROR ACT – AMNESTY

http://swazimedia.blogspot.com/2015/04/scrap-swazi-terror-act-amnesty.html