WHY PEOPLE ARE PROTESTING

The Guardian, UK

9 September 2011

SOURCE

Explainer: Why are people protesting in Swaziland?

Gripped by financial crisis and in thrall to a polygamous, absolute monarch, Swaziland is the scene of growing unrest

Thousands of people have been protesting this week in Swaziland, Africa's last absolute monarchy. Popular discontent has focused on King Mswati III, who has been on the throne for 25 years, and has at least a dozen wives, 27 children, and a fortune estimated at $200m.

How large are the protests?

Sikelela Dlamini, coordinator of the Swaziland United Democratic Front, a coaltion of pro-democracy groups, said more than 3,000 people marched in the provincial town of Siteki. A further 5,000 were in a standoff with police at a bus station in Manzini. There were no reports of violence. Earlier in the week, however, police fired tear gas and stun grenades to disperse crowds demanding an end to a political system that allows the king to run the country of 1.4 million people as a personal fiefdom. "Some people were beaten to a pulp," Dlamini told Reuters in neighouring South Africa.

Why are people demonstrating?

It's the economy. The current crisis for the landlocked country began in 2009 when South Africa went into recession. That triggered a collapse in revenue from a regional customs union dominated by South Africa that has historically accounted for two-thirds of Swaziland's budget. Swaziland has refused to cut spending - especially on the royal household or military - causing its budget deficit to swell to 14% of GDP, a figure comparable to Greece. In April, riot police used teargas and water cannons to quell pro-democracy demonstrations.

What is being done to address the economic problems?

The International Monetary Fund has demanded reforms to what is officially Africa's most bloated bureaucracy before it lends any money, while an emergency $340m bailout from South Africa is in question due to Swaziland's refusal to accept the need for political change. On the verge of bankrupcy, the government has been keeping itself afloat by dipping into central bank reserves and running up arrears of at least $180m, although there are fears civil servants may not be paid this month. The University of Swaziland failed to open on 8 August for the final term of the year and public hospitals have run out of medicines for patients.

What does the IMF recommend?

An IMF delegation has just spent two weeks in Swaziland, bordered by South Africa and Mozambique, to see whether it was doing enough to win the fund's seal of approval to secure foreign loans. The IMF said the government appointed by King Mswati had missed several targets to cut the budget deficit and advised it to pass a supplementary budget to cut spending, while preserving pro-poor spending, and strengthening spending controls to restore fiscal sustainability.

Does the country have political parties?

No. King Sobhuza, Mswati's father, scrapped the constitution in 1973 and banned political parties. King Mswati, who has been on the throne since 1986, rules by decree and says the country is not yet ready for multi-party politics. The kingdom's largest opposition party, the People's United Democratic Movement (Pudemo), was banned as a terrorist organisation in November 2008 and its president, Mario Masuku, arrested under the suppression of terrorism act. Masuku was acquitted of terrorism charges in September 2009 after his case was dropped due to lack of evidence. During last year's May Day celebrations, Pudemo member Sipho Jele was arrested and later found dead in his cell. There have been growing demands - fanned by protests in the Arab world - for greater democracy and limits on the king's power. Royalists have argued that democracy creates division, and that a monarch is a strong unifying force.

How poor is Swaziland?

Swaziland, Africa's third-largest sugar producer, is classified as a middle-income developing country, but income distribution is highly skewed and poverty in the rural areas is widespread. It also has the highest HIV and Aids infection rate in the world (26.1% HIV prevalence among 15 to 49-year-olds), with large economic and social implications. In view of the impact on agriculture of the HIV and Aids pandemic, the UN's World Food Programme provided food assistance to almost 180,000 people until 2007.

See also

SWAZI PRODEMOCRACY PATS ON THE BACK

http://swazimedia.blogspot.com/2011/09/swazi-prodemocracy-pats-on-back.html

SWAZILAND’S STRUGGLE FOR FREEDOM

You can run but you cannot hide. There is no getting away from that fact that the international community is paying more attention to Swaziland now than it has done since the Swazi elections and the so-called 40/40 celebrations to mark the birthday of King Mswati III and the anniversary of Swaziland’s independence from Great Britain.

Not only has this past week’s Swazi Royal Family sex scandal put the spotlight on the way King Mswati, sub-Saharan Africa’s last absolute monarch, runs his kingdom, but the continuing attack by the Swazi state on prodemocracy campaigners highlights the serious undermining of human rights in Swaziland.

The Guardian (UK) published yesterday (8 August 2010) a commentary on the situation in Swaziland written by Blessing-Miles Tendi.

Sadly, he concludes, ‘The key determinant of whether King Mswati III will adopt political reforms is the extent to which opposition and civil society are able to mobilise popular Swazi sentiment, which is largely in favour of democratic reform, to press for change. The prospects for political liberalisation in Swaziland are bleak. Swazi democracy and human rights activists face a lonely, protracted and uphill battle against an obstinate and ruthless monarch.’

Click here to read the full article.

SWAZILAND HISTORY REPEATS ITSELF

In Swaziland, the more things change the more they stay the same.

With the national election presently taking place in Swaziland, progressives are complaining about the lack of democracy in the kingdom. King Mswati III is an autonomous monarch and the Swazi parliament has no real power. Political parties are banned and the King chooses who he wants as Prime Minister, even if that person has not been elected to parliament.

There is a misunderstanding in some quarters in Swaziland and in the international community that in the past things used to be different. Next week (6 September 2008) Swaziland marks the 40th anniversary of its independence from Great Britain, so now might be a good time to remind ourselves of the controversy that surrounded the 1968 independence and what happened next.

Elections had been held in April 1967 and the Ngwane National Liberatory Congress (NNLC) won 20 percent of the votes, but no seats in parliament. This was because of the way constituencies were drawn up and the fact that the candidate with the highest vote in each constituency won the seat in parliament.

The Imbkodvo National Movement, a party set up by King Sobhuza II, won all seats to parliament.

Even though the NNLC clearly had a large amount of support in the kingdom, it was not allowed to be part of the discussions Swaziland had in 1968 with Great Britain in London over the terms of independence.

The Times of Swaziland reported at the time (23 February 1968) that NNLC leader Dr Ambrose Zwane and supporters went to London uninvited and lay down on the cold steps of Marlborough House, venue of the independence conference, as a protest.

They were eventually carried away by policemen.

Zwane told reporters, ‘I am furious that only chiefs and white settlers have been invited to the conference.’

He added, ‘There are two South Africans in the delegation to London. They are the Trojan Horse in Swaziland and it is only a matter of time before Swaziland becomes another Bantustan.’

The international media were not much interested in the independence talks, not even in the fact that Swaziland was Britain’s last colony in Africa to be granted independence.

The NNCL protest did however make the news. The Guardian newspaper, (published in Manchester and London, UK) reported (19 February 1968) that the NNLC leaders claim ‘that the [1967] election was unfair and are demanding that there should be a fresh general election before the territory becomes independent’.

The Guardian went on, ‘Their claim is that during the election campaign there was intimidation of the opposition party by the King’s supporters and that the constituencies had been gerrymandering so as to split the forces of the NNLC.’

Although, the powerful elite in Swaziland tried to ignore the NNLC, the international community did not.

On the eve of the independence celebrations, the London-based Financial Times newspaper reported (5 September 1968) that the NNLC could not be ignored. Referring to the 1967 election, the newspaper reported, ‘[NNLC] votes came mainly from the tiny, but growing, white-collar urban working class.

‘Moreover, with hindsight it is now apparent that the vote was not so much for the NNLC but against the Establishment, so that even if Dr Zwane [the NNLC leader] disappears from the scene, the forces which had been channelled through his party will remain.’

A constitution was agreed between Britain and Swaziland which provided for a parliament and political parties, but executive authority would be vested in the hereditary King who would appoint the prime minister and, on the latter's advice, the cabinet.

But that wasn’t enough for King Sobhuza II.

According to Contemporary Review, published in Oxford, UK, (December 1996), ‘In 1973, King Sobhuza staged a coup when he scrapped the constitution in reaction to a perceived threat posed by increased support for the opposition in parliament. (The King’s party, the Imbkodvo National Movement, lost three of the 50 seats in the House of Assembly in 1972 - its first loss since independence - to the Ngwane National Liberatory Congress.) The King's attempt to deport one of the opposition MPs was successfully legally challenged and the King went on to declare a state of emergency: he suspended the constitution, dissolved parliament and set up a national army.

‘Five years later, parliament was reinstated and indirect elections on a non-party basis were held, underpinned by the Tinkhundla (traditional chieftaincy councils) which preserved the royal control of executive and legislative processes. The functions of the Libandla, the bicameral legislature (comprising the House of Assembly and the Senate), were limited to debating government proposals and to advising the King. Eventually, the monarch's control became absolute, increasingly conservative and personal. This was subsequently enshrined in the 1978 Constitution, which introduced the new system of government where the King appointed ten deputies to the 40-member House of Assembly while the remainder were elected indirectly through the Tinkhundla, comprising chiefs appointed by the King. Equally, the King appointed the majority of senators, whilst the House deputies nominated ten of their number to the “upper house”’.

The 1973 Royal Proclamation has not been revoked, even though Swaziland has had a new constitution since 2005.

See also

HISTORY

SEARCH FOR SWAZI CHILD

A journalist in the United Kingdom has been circulating a request in Swaziland seeking help in a documentary television programme she is making.

Here is her letter.

My name is Caroline Irby.

I'm a photographer and writer, currently working on a project for the Guardian newspaper and Channel 4 for which I need to photograph and interview a Swazi child living in the UK.

My aim is, by August this year (2008), to find one child from every countryin the world living in the UK. There are 193 countries (according tothe UN) so hopefully I'll be photographing close to 193 children.

The finished work will be published in the Guardian magazine later this year and Channel 4 will be showing the pictures and extracts from the interviews in a series of mini documentaries.

So far I've interviewed 128 children but have not been able to find a Swazi.

Do you think you might be able to help? I'd be so appreciative!

The material collected will be a historical snapshot of the UK today; its tone will be upbeat, a celebration of diversity.

I'm travellingto all corners of the UK in search of children. The criteria are that they are aged between 0 and 16 (inclusive) and, ideally, that theywere born in their native country, to parents of that nationality.

I ask about the differences between the child's country of origin andthe UK, what they miss, what their hopes are for the future.

It doesn't matter how much or little they remember of their country. If you'd like to see some of my work, please visit www.carolineirby.com – I'm CRB checked and work regularly with children on assignments for organisations such as UNICEF, Save theChildren, Oxfam etc.

I'm travelling to meet the children at their homes, schools oractivity clubs, then take very informal pictures showing the children doing something normal for them: it could be playing, celebrating a festival or just a simple portrait.

It takes around an hour of their time. I really hope to hear from you soon - I don't want to leave Swaziland out of this project!

Best wishes
Caroline Irby

Caroline Irby
21 Montford Place
LondonSE11 5DE
www.carolineirby.com
(+44) 7967 659 043