SWAZI SUPREME COURT NEPOTISM FEAR

A raft of appointments of judges to Swaziland’s Supreme Court has raised questions about nepotism in the kingdom ruled by absolute monarch, King Mswati III.

Even one of the newspapers in Swaziland that he in effect owns has raised doubts about the wisdom of appointing judges who are related to one another.

And, the Swazi Attorney-General Majahenkhaba Dlamini has been appointed a temporary Supreme Court judge for the month of July 2015, raising questions about the independence from government of the judiciary.

On Friday (26 June 2015), seven acting judges to the Supreme Court were announced, which the Sunday Observer newspaper reported, ‘resulted in the kingdom’s judiciary turning into a close knit family affair of spouses and siblings’.

The newspaper reported, ‘Newly-appointed Judge of the Supreme Court Majahenkhaba Dlamini joins his wife High Court Judge Mumcy Dlamini as members of the judiciary.

‘Former High Court Judge Qinisile Mabuza and her brother Sipho Nkosi have both been appointed Judges of the Supreme Court – the latter’s appointment is on an acting basis while the former’s is permanent.

‘There is also High Court Judge Nkululeko Hlophe whose wife is Supreme Court Registrar and Judicial Service Commission (JSC) Secretary Lorraine Hlophe.

‘With Majahenkhaba and his wife Judge Mumcy, questions have been raised on what would happen should the former, in his capacity as acting Supreme Court Judge, find himself having to review cases that were decided by the latter at the High Court.

‘There are suggestions that there are strong possibilities of this scenario coming true.’

There are also concerns that some of the new judges might not be suitably qualified.

The Observer reported, ‘A senior judicial expert who spoke to the Sunday Observer, though stating clearly not being opposed to the appointments, was worried that Acting Judges Nkosi and Cloete were appointed straight to the Supreme Court without any experience of presiding in the lower courts, especially the High Court.

‘“There is a lot that they need to learn, which they can do by presiding at the High Court before they are elevated to the Supreme Court,” said the expert.’

 The appointment of Attorney-General Majahenkhaba Dlamini to the Supreme Court for one month has raised doubts about King Mswati’s commitment to the separation of powers between the legislative, the executive and the judiciary. 

Dlamini is a member of the Swazi Government that was hand-picked by King Mswati, an ex-official member of the House of Assembly and now a judge. That gives him a place in all three branches of government.

The full list of Supreme Court Judges:

• Acting Chief Justice Bheki Maphalala

• Dr. Ben Odoki JA

• Justice Stanley Maphalala JA

• Justice Jacobus Annandale JA

• Justice Qinisile Mabuza JA

• Justice Mbutfo Mamba JA

• AG Majahenkhaba Dlamini JA

• Lawyer Robert Cloete AJA

• Lawyer Sipho Nkosi AJA

SUPREME COURT THREATEN TO QUIT

Two Supreme Court judges have threatened to resign if a warrant issued by the Swaziland Chief Justice for the arrest of three High Court judges who are critical of him is served, a South African newspaper has reported.

Now, the Mail and Guardian reports arrests may take place immediately after the present Supreme Court session ends on Friday (30 May 2014).

Swaziland’s Chief Justice Michael reportedly issued the warrants on 16 May 2014, but the Swazi police did not make the arrests. 

The three judges are judges Mumcy Dlamini, Bheki Maphalala and Mbutfo Mamba.

CJ Ramodibedi denied a report that originally appeared in the Swazi Observer, a newspaper in effect owned by King Mswati III, who rules Swaziland as sub-Saharan Africa’s last absolute monarch, and who appointed the Lesotho-born Ramodibedi to his office.

In its report, the Observer said the arrest warrants were issued because the CJ felt the judges were ‘ignoring his orders and bringing the High Court into disrepute’.

The newspaper reported, ‘According to a reliable source at the High Court, the Chief Justice alleges that Judge Bheki Maphalala is influencing his staff members not to take orders from him. Maphalala, according to the source, is spearheading a High Court rebellion.

The Observer added, ‘Judge Mamba is alleged to have tried taking over the bail application of The Nation Editor Bheki Makhubu and Human Rights Lawyer Thulani Maseko.’

After Ramodibedi’s denial of the story, the Observer ran an editorial saying it stood by its report.

The Mail and Guardian reported an unnamed source saying the execution of the warrants had been delayed ‘because two foreign judges of the supreme court – Swaziland’s court of appeal – had threatened an immediate walkout if the arrests took place.

‘The supreme court is in session until May 30, and there are fears that the arrests could take place immediately after it goes into recess.’

In its original report, the Observer said Ramodibedi already had replacements lined up to take over from the arrested judges.

See also

‘CJ ARREST WARRANTS FOR CRITIC JUDGES’

http://swazimedia.blogspot.com/2014/05/cj-arrest-warrant-for-critic-judges.html

‘CJ ARREST WARRANT FOR CRITIC JUDGES’

A newspaper in Swaziland reported on Monday (19 May 2014) that the controversial Chief Justice Michael Ramodibedi had issued warrants for the arrest of three High Court Judges because they disagreed with his actions. 

He was reported to be ready to appoint his own judges to replace those arrested.

The Swazi Observer, a newspaper in effect owned by King Mswati III, who appointed Ramodibedi, said the three judges were Justices Mumcy Dlamini, Bheki Maphalala and Mbutfo Mamba. At the time of this report (Monday 19 May 2014) police had not executed the warrants.

The Observer reported Ramodibedi allegedly issued the warrants last Friday. They were issued, it said because the CJ felt the judges were ‘ignoring his orders and bringing the High Court into disrepute’.

The newspaper reported, ‘According to a reliable source at the High Court, the Chief Justice alleges that Judge Bheki Maphalala is influencing his staff members not to take orders from him. Maphalala, according to the source, is spearheading a High Court rebellion.

‘Judge Mamba is alleged to have tried taking over the bail application of The Nation Editor Bheki Makhubu and Human Rights Lawyer Thulani Maseko. 

‘This is alleged to have angered the CJ and he decided to have him also arrested. “Judge Mumcy is the number one enemy of the CJ. It is no surprise that she has been included in the list of those whose warrants of arrest were issued,” the source alleged.’ 

‘Judge Mumcy has on record ruled that the CJ erred in the way he issued the warrants of arrest that landed The Nation Editor Bheki Makhubu and Thulani Maseko in jail. She released the duo but they were later re-arrested soon after gaining freedom.’

The newspaper added, ‘[The] CJ is alleged to have highlighted in his chambers that he no longer trusted most of the Judges of the High Court. This is alleged to have transpired when The Law Society of Swaziland wanted their application for the removal of Judge Mpendulo Simelane allocated a judge. The Chief Justice is alleged to have failed to allocate the matter and highlighted that he no longer trusted most of the judges.’

The Observer reported. ‘Should the warrants be effected and the judges arrested, the CJ is alleged to have planned to appoint interim judges who will deal with the Law Society, which wants a full bench to listen to their application calling for the firing of newly appointed Judge Mpendulo Simelane. The CJ is alleged to be afraid to have the three judges sit in the full bench and listen to the Judge Mpendulo case as they might rule against him.’

Ramodibedi is at the centre of a number of controversial decisions in Swaziland. Last week the Mail and Guardian newspaper in South Africa reported that Ramodibedi has told Swazi judges that they have a constitutional duty to obey him. He has also ordered that judges could not hear cases against King Mswati III, who rules as sub-Saharan Africa’s last absolute monarch, or royal institutions.

The Mail and Guardian reported that Ramodibedi had a reputation for intimidation. He has intervened in the continuing trial against Bheki Makhubu, the editor of the Nation magazine, who is in court on contempt of court charges after publishing articles critical of Ramodibedi and the Swazi judiciary.

The newspaper reported, ‘Ramodibedi’s interventions in the Makhubu trial, some of doubtful legality, are seen as driven by both a personal grudge and a desire to gratify Mswati. The treatment of Makhubu shows signs of vindictive overkill: armed police stormed his parents’ rural homestead and a heavily armed police guard escorted him from prison to court.

It added Ramodibedi laid two contempt charges against Makhubu.

‘Makhubu was denied bail as an alleged flight risk. Ramodibedi has also personally threatened the managing editor of the Swazi Observer with arrest if the newspaper continued to comment on the Makhubu trial,’ it said.

‘T-SHIRT TERRORISTS’ FREE ON BAIL

The seven ‘T-shirt terrorists’ in Swaziland were granted bail of E15,000 (US$1,500) when they appeared at the Swazi High Court on Monday (5 May 2014).

The seven men had been in jail on remand since 23 April 2014 charged with terrorism offences because they allegedly wore T-shirts with the name of the banned pro-democracy group PUDEMO on them and allegedly chanted slogans.

PUDEMO (the People’s United Democratic Movement) is the best known of several democracy groups banned as ‘terrorist organisations’ in Swaziland, where King Mswati III rules as sub-Saharan Africa’s last absolute monarch.

At an earlier hearing, High Court Judge Mumcy Dlamini had asked the prosecution to provide evidence of the chants the PUDEMO members allegedly made but, local media report, it failed to do so.

Each of the accused men is charged with four counts under the Suppression of Terrorism Act.

The seven men are PUDEMO Secretary General Mlungisi Makhanya; Public Relations Officer Brian Clive Ntshangase; Bongani Gama; Bafana Mabandla Magongo; Siza Jabulani Tsabedze; Ntobeko Gideon Maseko and Mangaliso Simanga Khumalo.

See also

DEMOCRACY LEADERS JAILED ON REMAND

http://swazimedia.blogspot.com/2014/05/democracy-leaders-jailed-on-remand.html

 

‘T-SHIRT TERRORISTS’ STILL IN JAIL

http://swazimedia.blogspot.com/2014/05/t-shirt-terrorists-still-in-jail.html

SWAZI ACTIVIST INQUEST STARTS

Sipho Jele, the Swaziland democracy activist who died while on remand at Sidvwashini Correctional facility, asked to be sent there because he feared being ‘tubed’ (tortured and suffocated) if he was sent back to police custody, an inquest into his death heard.

The Swaziland Director of Public Prosecutions Mumcy Dlamini said she was pleased to hear this because it meant Jele had not yet been tortured while at the police station. Dlamini told the inquest as far as she knew the only reason why Jele wanted to go to Sidvwashini was his fear of torture by police.

A jailor, Assistant Superintendent Richard Mthukutheli Fakudze, told the inquest he found Jele hanging from a concrete bar in the bathroom of his prison cell at about 5am on May 3 and he just knew Jele had killed himself. While he gave his testimony, he was interrupted by Prosecutor Phila Dlamini who warned him to only say what he observed and desist from giving an opinion. Fakudze had conclusively said Jele hanged himself yet he found him hanging. Said Dlamini, ‘If you insist that he hanged himself, you are actually saying that you saw him tying the blanket around his neck and hanging himself.’

The inquest was told that Jele was charged under the Suppression of Terrorism Act.

The Times of Swaziland, the kingdom’s only independent daily newspaper, reported that two police officers gave ‘contradictory submissions’ about how Jele was arrested at a Workers’ Day celebration.

The Times reported, ‘One glaring anomaly was revealed by witness number three, Constable David Tsabedze, who, despite proof that he had recorded Jele’s health on the night of May 1, 2010, the officer denied ever doing so. Another anomaly is that despite that the suspect was brought to the police station at 5.30pm on May 1, he was only placed in a police cell at 11pm and no one could come forward to state what was happening in the meantime.

‘He was also taken out of the Manzini Police Station’s cell for interrogation purposes for hours on different occasions and one of the officers says it is unclear whether they also took him out of the building.’

SWAZI GOVERNMENT CASE 'HOPELESS'

Some of the mystery surrounding the reason for the acquittal of Mario Masuku on a terrorism charge has been lifted.

Mbutfo Mamba, the High Court Judge who halted the trial only five hours into a trial that was expected to last several days, says the prosecution’s case was ‘hopeless’.

In his formal ruling he said that the prosecution claimed that Masuku, the President of the banned People’s United Democratic Movement (PUDEMO), contravened the Suppression of Terrorism Act when after a failed bomb attempt he told a funeral gathering ‘they will continue with the bombings’.

The judge said the prosecution failed to make clear who the ‘they’ referred to in the statement were.

Put simply, the prosecution failed to provide evidence that the words Masuku used were actually an incitement to anyone.

The judge’s ruling adds to the humiliation heaped on to the Swazi Government when the case was halted last month (September 2009). The High Court was faced with incoherent statements by witnesses and what even the Swazi Observer, the newspaper in effect owned by King Mswati III, sub-Saharan Africa’s last absolute monarch, called ‘a series of dramatic errors.’

The Swaziland Director of Public Prosecutions Mumcy Dlamini was particularly at fault in presenting a dire case.

In his ruling Judge Mamba gave the government a lesson in English grammar on the wording of the indictment.

‘It is, unfortunately, not a model of clarity. It offends against one of the primary rules of English grammar. It uses the pronoun “they” without any first reference to the object to which it refers. In short, it does not explain who is referred to as “they” – the persons who will continue with the bombing of the government vital structures and installations.’

He went on, ‘[Witness 4] did say in his testimony in re-examination that the accused used the words “we shall continue the bombing” of government structures. This was, however, clearly an afterthought and a desperate attempt to mitigate or ameliorate the hopelessness of the evidence by the Crown.

‘All the three crown witnesses testified that the accused called the deceased a hero. His heroics or heroic deeds were not spelt out or stated. The matter would certainly have been much different had the accused said he was a hero for bombing government structures. There is no evidence that he said so.’

So, humiliation heaped upon humiliation for the Swazi Government. We can all have a good laugh, but we can’t be complacent. The Swazi Government may be stupid, but my God it’s still dangerous.

For more details of the ruling click here.