Search This Blog

Showing posts with label Monarchical Democracy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Monarchical Democracy. Show all posts

Saturday, 1 February 2020

Swaziland’s absolute monarch tells parliament to ignore calls for democracy and stick with him


King Mswati III, the absolute monarch of Swaziland (eSwatini), told his parliament to ignore calls for democratic change and instead embrace the culture that allows him and his family to rule unhindered.

He was speaking at the opening of the 2020 parliament on Friday (31 January 2020).

The parliament has no powers and acts mainly as a rubber-stamp for the King. Political parties are barred from taking part in elections and the King appoints the Prime Minister and cabinet ministers. He also selects top judges and civil servants.

He appoints 10 of the 69 members of the House of Assembly. None of the 30 members of the Swazi Senate are elected by the people.

Groups that advocate for democracy are banned under the Suppression of Terrorism Act.

The King told Parliament, ‘Democracy is tailored towards the cultural norms and beliefs of each nation. we call upon all Emaswati [Swazi people] including those living abroad, to remain true to their identity. 

‘They should place the interest of our nation above their own. we should cherish our unity and family relationship that has existed since our predecessors founded this great nation so many years ago.’

He added, ‘God gave each nation its unique culture to practice and pass on to future generations. there is no culture or ideology that is supreme which has to be imposed on other nations of the world.’

In September 2013 King Mswati announced that Swaziland would be ruled by what he called ‘Monarchical Democracy.’  He said this meant he would take advice from his subjects before making decisions that affected the kingdom.

The King has been under increasing criticism from democratic nations to allow his subjects the opportunity to have political parties and elect their own government.

Following the 2018 national election the United Nations Human Rights Committee stated the ‘legitimacy and credibility’ of the election was ‘significantly hampered’ because political parties were banned. The King had ‘excessive powers’ in the appointment of the Government, Parliament and the judiciary, it stated.

It added, ‘The legitimacy and credibility of the elections was significantly hampered by the design of the electoral mechanisms as a culture of political pluralism is lacking. There is no freedom of genuine and pluralistic political debate, political parties are unable to register, contest elections, field candidates or otherwise participate in the formation of a Government.’

Following the election King Mswati appointed six members of his Royal Family to the House of Assembly and eight members to the Senate.

About seven in ten of the 1.3 million population of Swaziland live in abject poverty.

The King has been criticised internationally for his lavish lifestyle. He has two private airplanes, at least 13 palaces and fleets of top-of-the-range cars. At his 50th birthday in 2018 he wore a watch worth US$1.6 million and a suit beaded with diamonds that weighed 6 kg. Days earlier he had taken delivery of his second private jet. This one, an Airbus A340, cost US$13.2 to purchase but with VIP upgrades was estimated to have cost US$30 million.

In November 2019 King Mswati bought a fleet of Rolls-Royce cars for himself and his family. Reports on the number purchased have ranged from 13 to 15 and they were reported to have cost up to US$4 million.

In the same month Swaziland also bought him 126 BMW cars and motorbikes to escort the Royal family around the kingdom.

By Richard Rooney

See also

U.S. Ambassador to Swaziland renews criticism of King’s lavish spending while people live in poverty

The truth of ‘monarchical democracy’

New name for non-democracy

Monday, 6 May 2019

Swaziland absolute monarch tries to sell his undemocratic kingdom to the world

Swaziland / eSwatini, which is ruled by King Mswati III as an absolute monarch, has started a campaign to encourage people internationally to support the kingdom’s undemocratic political system.

In Swaziland the Constitution allows the King to dominate all political and public life in the kingdom. Political parties are banned from taking part in elections and groups that advocate multi-party democracy are outlawed. Individuals who speak out against the system are prosecuted under terrorism and sedition laws.

The system of government in Swaziland is known as ‘Tinkhundla’ or ‘monarchical democracy’. It puts all power in the hands of the monarchy. King Mswati chooses the Prime Minister, cabinet ministers and many members of the House of Assembly and Senate. He also appoints members of the judiciary and all senior political postholders in his kingdom.

The King has demanded Minister of Tinkhundla Administration and Development David Ngcamphalala set up a task group to document the Tinkhundla ideology. According to the Swazi Observer, a newspaper in effect owned by King Mswati, the task is to ‘correct misconceptions that have been developed, especially at the international stage,’ about the system of government in Swaziland. Ngcamphalala added he wanted to increase investor confidence in the kingdom.

The newspaper said the process of documenting the Tinkhundla system would include consultative meetings ‘with specific but relevant stakeholders’.

The intention, the Observer reported, was that after the review the ‘attitude would change internally and externally on how Emaswati [the people of Swaziland] are governed’.

However, the chances are the exercise is likely to only emphasise the lack of democracy in Swaziland. It is no secret that King Mswati rules as an absolute monarch. His position is enshrined in the Swaziland Constitution that came into effect in 2006.

Human rights violations in Swaziland have been well documented. Recently, the United States Department of State in its annual review of the kingdom, highlighted ‘human rights issues’ across a wide range of areas which included, ‘restrictions on political participation, corruption, rape and violence against women linked in part to government inaction, criminalization of same-sex sexual conduct, although rarely enforced, and child labor’. 

Amnesty International in a review of Swaziland for 2017 / 2018 stated, ‘The Public Order Act and the Suppression of Terrorism Act severely limited the rights to freedom of expression, association and peaceful assembly.’ 

It added, The Public Order Act, ‘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.’

See also

No appetite by Swaziland to investigate human rights abuses, corruption: U.S. report
Swaziland in economic freefall with human rights failings, report shows
Swaziland ‘not free’ as King keeps grip on power, Freedom House reports
https://swazimedia.blogspot.com/2019/02/swaziland-not-free-as-king-keeps-grip.html

Friday, 21 September 2018

Swaziland Heading For Lowest Election Turnout as Ordinary People Support Democratic Change

Swaziland could be heading for the lowest election turnout in its modern history on Friday (21 September 2018).

Swaziland (recently renamed Eswatini by King Mswati III) is ruled by an absolute monarch, political parties are banned from taking part in the election and no members of the Swazi Senate are elected by the people.

The King chooses the Prime Minister and Government. The people are only allowed to elect 59 members of the House of Assembly with another 10 appointed by the King. No members of the Swazi Senate are elected by the people.

This will be the third election since Swaziland’s constitution came into effect in 2006 and there is mounting evidence that ordinary people in the kingdom want more democracy.

In the first round of this year’s election for seats in the House of Assembly (held on 24 August 2018) 156,983 people voted (of the 600,000 the Elections and Boundaries Commission (EBC) said were eligible). That compared to the 251,278 people who voted in the final round of elections in 2013 and 189,559 who voted in 2008.

In June 2018 after revising the figure the EBC announced that 544,310 people had registered to vote this year. In the first round (known as the Primary Election) only 26.16 percent of those eligible voted.

People head for the final round of elections on Friday and there is no evidence of a surge in interest. The turnout in elections is important as voting is the only way people in Swaziland have to demonstrate their support (or lack of it) for the political system. The King and his supporters say that the ordinary people in Swaziland support the system that the King calls ‘Monarchical Democracy,’ and which he says is a partnership between himself and the people.

All debate on democratising the kingdom is ruthlessly crushed by King Mswati’s state police and security forces. Meetings called to discuss democratic change are routinely disrupted by police and prodemocracy activists are jailed. Groups that support democracy are banned under the Suppression of Terrorism Act. 

No news media in Swaziland support allowing political parties to contest elections.

Despite the closing down of political debate in Swaziland, one independent international group called Afrobarometer has run a number of polls in recent years surveying the views of ordinary Swazi people.

In 2015, it reported only seven in a hundred Swazi people said they were ‘very satisfied’ with the way democracy worked in Swaziland.

More than half (51 percent) did not think the kingdom was a democracy or it was a democracy with major problems.


Nearly six in ten people (59 percent) said they were ‘not at all free’ to say what they think.

And nearly three-quarters (73 percent) said they were ‘not at all free’ or ‘not very free’ to join any political organisation they wanted.

Afrobarometer is a pan-African, non-partisan research network that conducts public attitude surveys on democracy, governance, economic conditions, and related issues across more than 30 countries in Africa. It conducts face-to-face interviews.

This was not the first time Afrobarometer found a desire for democracy in Swaziland. In 2014 in a report called ‘Let the People Have a Say’ it said more than six people in ten in Swaziland said they were not satisfied with the way democracy worked in the kingdom.

The research surveyed 34-countries in Africa and asked a series of questions about what people thought about democracy and how democratic they thought their own country was.

But, only in Swaziland were researchers not allowed to ask a question about whether people rejected ‘one man rule’. In its report Afrobarometer said this was because ‘a near-absolute monarch resists democratization’ in the kingdom.


A total of 22 percent of people interviewed in Swaziland said they believed non-democratic governments can be preferable to democracies.

Dissent in Swaziland is often put down by police and state forces, but 86 percent of people rejected military rule for Swaziland.

In 2013, Afrobarometer reported two thirds of Swazi people wanted the kingdom to become a democracy and they wanted to choose their own leaders ‘through honest and open elections’. They also strongly disapproved of allowing King Mswati, who rules Swaziland as sub-Saharan Africa’s last absolute monarch, to decide on everything in Swaziland.

An opinion poll conducted by Afrobarometer asked 1,200 Swazis aged 18 or over from across the kingdom how democratic they thought Swaziland was. Only 12 percent said that at present Swaziland had ‘high levels’ of democracy. When asked where they would like the kingdom to be ‘in the future’, 67 percent said they wanted to see ‘high levels’ of democracy.

Afrobarometer reported that 75 percent of people interviewed agreed with the statement, ‘We should choose our leaders through open and honest elections.’

Despite King Mswati’s stranglehold on political life in Swaziland, 46 percent of respondents agreed that, ‘Members of Parliament represent the people; therefore they should make laws for the country, even if the King does not agree.’

A total of 77 percent of respondents disapproved of abolishing elections and Parliament, ‘so that the King can decide on everything’.

In 2016, Afrobarometer reported that Swaziland came a long way last in a survey of 36 African countries looking at political freedom. Of those asked, ‘In this country how free are you to join any political organisation you want?’ only 7 percent responded, ‘completely free.’

In addition, only 18 percent of those surveyed said they had complete freedom of speech and 56 percent said they had complete freedom to vote.

Afrobarometer reported that its survey coincided with the fiftieth anniversary of the United Nations International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). With the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), it formalizes the right to peaceful assembly (Article 21) and freedom of association (Article 22), among other fundamental human rights. 

The report quoted the UN Special Rapporteur saying, ‘freedoms of assembly and association “are a vehicle for the exercise of many other civil, cultural, economic, political and social rights, allowing people to express their political opinions, engage in artistic pursuits, engage in religious observances, join trade unions, elect leaders, and hold them accountable.” As such, they play “a decisive role” in building and consolidating democracy. 

Richard Rooney

See also

Low Turnout At Swaziland Election Fuels Doubts About Support For King’s Absolute Monarchy
Swaziland (Eswatini) Election 2018: Links to Information and Analysis From Swazi Media Commentary
https://swazimedia.blogspot.com/2018/09/swaziland-eswatini-election-2018-links.html 

Organised Certainty, Why elections in Swaziland are not democratic
Women Election Candidates in Swaziland Forced to Address Voters on Their Knees to Show Respect For Men
Vote-Rigging Claims During Swaziland’s Election Grow. Calls For Some Polls To Be Re-Run
Swaziland’s Independent Observation Group Says Election ‘Free And Fair’ But Identifies Many Shortcomings
https://swazimedia.blogspot.com/2018/09/swazilands-independent-observation.html

Monday, 17 September 2018

Swaziland Heading For Lowest Election Turnout as Ordinary People Support Democratic Change

Swaziland could be heading for the lowest election turnout in its modern history on Friday (21 September 2018).

Swaziland (recently renamed Eswatini by King Mswati III) is ruled by an absolute monarch, political parties are banned from taking part in the election and no members of the Swazi Senate are elected by the people.

The King chooses the Prime Minister and Government. The people are only allowed to elect 59 members of the House of Assembly with another 10 appointed by the King. No members of the Swazi Senate are elected by the people.

This will be the third election since Swaziland’s constitution came into effect in 2006 and there is mounting evidence that ordinary people in the kingdom want more democracy.

In the first round of this year’s election for seats in the House of Assembly (held on 24 August 2018) 156,983 people voted (of the 600,000 the Elections and Boundaries Commission (EBC) said were eligible). That compared to the 251,278 people who voted in the final round of elections in 2013 and 189,559 who voted in 2008.

In June 2018 after revising the figure the EBC announced that 544,310 people had registered to vote this year. In the first round (known as the Primary Election) only 26.16 percent of those eligible voted.

People head for the final round of elections on Friday and there is no evidence of a surge in interest. The turnout in elections is important as voting is the only way people in Swaziland have to demonstrate their support (or lack of it) for the political system. The King and his supporters say that the ordinary people in Swaziland support the system that the King calls ‘Monarchical Democracy,’ and which he says is a partnership between himself and the people.

All debate on democratising the kingdom is ruthlessly crushed by King Mswati’s state police and security forces. Meetings called to discuss democratic change are routinely disrupted by police and prodemocracy activists are jailed. Groups that support democracy are banned under the Suppression of Terrorism Act. 

No news media in Swaziland support allowing political parties to contest elections.

Despite the closing down of political debate in Swaziland, one independent international group called Afrobarometer has run a number of polls in recent years surveying the views of ordinary Swazi people.

In 2015, it reported only seven in a hundred Swazi people said they were ‘very satisfied’ with the way democracy worked in Swaziland.

More than half (51 percent) did not think the kingdom was a democracy or it was a democracy with major problems.


Nearly six in ten people (59 percent) said they were ‘not at all free’ to say what they think. And nearly three-quarters (73 percent) said they were ‘not at all free’ or ‘not very free’ to join any political organisation they wanted.

Afrobarometer is a pan-African, non-partisan research network that conducts public attitude surveys on democracy, governance, economic conditions, and related issues across more than 30 countries in Africa. It conducts face-to-face interviews.

This was not the first time Afrobarometer found a desire for democracy in Swaziland. In 2014 in a report called ‘Let the People Have a Say’ it said more than six people in ten in Swaziland said they were not satisfied with the way democracy worked in the kingdom.

The research surveyed 34-countries in Africa and asked a series of questions about what people thought about democracy and how democratic they thought their own country was.

But, only in Swaziland were researchers not allowed to ask a question about whether people rejected ‘one man rule’. In its report Afrobarometer said this was because ‘a near-absolute monarch resists democratization’ in the kingdom.


A total of 22 percent of people interviewed in Swaziland said they believed non-democratic governments can be preferable to democracies.

Dissent in Swaziland is often put down by police and state forces, but 86 percent of people rejected military rule for Swaziland.

In 2013, Afrobarometer reported two thirds of Swazi people wanted the kingdom to become a democracy and they wanted to choose their own leaders ‘through honest and open elections’. They also strongly disapproved of allowing King Mswati, who rules Swaziland as sub-Saharan Africa’s last absolute monarch, to decide on everything in Swaziland.

An opinion poll conducted by Afrobarometer asked 1,200 Swazis aged 18 or over from across the kingdom how democratic they thought Swaziland was. Only 12 percent said that at present Swaziland had ‘high levels’ of democracy. When asked where they would like the kingdom to be ‘in the future’, 67 percent said they wanted to see ‘high levels’ of democracy.

Afrobarometer reported that 75 percent of people interviewed agreed with the statement, ‘We should choose our leaders through open and honest elections.’

Despite King Mswati’s stranglehold on political life in Swaziland, 46 percent of respondents agreed that, ‘Members of Parliament represent the people; therefore they should make laws for the country, even if the King does not agree.’

A total of 77 percent of respondents disapproved of abolishing elections and Parliament, ‘so that the King can decide on everything’.

In 2016, Afrobarometer reported that Swaziland came a long way last in a survey of 36 African countries looking at political freedom. Of those asked, ‘In this country how free are you to join any political organisation you want?’ only 7 percent responded, ‘completely free.’

In addition, only 18 percent of those surveyed said they had complete freedom of speech and 56 percent said they had complete freedom to vote.

Afrobarometer reported that its survey coincided with the fiftieth anniversary of the United Nations International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). With the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR), it formalizes the right to peaceful assembly (Article 21) and freedom of association (Article 22), among other fundamental human rights. 

The report quoted the UN Special Rapporteur saying, ‘freedoms of assembly and association “are a vehicle for the exercise of many other civil, cultural, economic, political and social rights, allowing people to express their political opinions, engage in artistic pursuits, engage in religious observances, join trade unions, elect leaders, and hold them accountable.” As such, they play “a decisive role” in building and consolidating democracy. 

Richard Rooney

See also

Low Turnout At Swaziland Election Fuels Doubts About Support For King’s Absolute Monarchy
Swaziland (Eswatini) Election 2018: Links to Information and Analysis From Swazi Media Commentary
Organised Certainty, Why elections in Swaziland are not democratic
Women Election Candidates in Swaziland Forced to Address Voters on Their Knees to Show Respect For Men
Vote-Rigging Claims During Swaziland’s Election Grow. Calls For Some Polls To Be Re-Run
Swaziland’s Independent Observation Group Says Election ‘Free And Fair’ But Identifies Many Shortcomings
https://swazimedia.blogspot.com/2018/09/swazilands-independent-observation.html

Thursday, 2 June 2016

KING MISLEADS SADC ON DEMOCRACY

King Mswati III of Swaziland, sub-Saharan Africa’s last absolute monarch, mislead a SADC forum when he said the kingdom he ruled was a ‘democracy’ because elections were held.

He told members of the SADC Parliamentary Forum that Monarchical Democracy, an invention of the King dating back to 2013, was “a new democratic ideology that works”.

The Times of Swaziland, the only independent daily newspaper in the kingdom where media are heavily censored, reported on Thursday (2 June 2016) that a message from the King read by the Deputy Prime Minister Paul Shabangu said, ‘The ballot box is the will of the people who vote for an individual, who will provide advice and counsel to the King and country in a manner that ensures transparency and accountability.’

He did not mention that in Swaziland political parties are banned and that the Swazi people were only allowed to select 55 of the 65 members of the House of Assembly, with the King appointing the others. No members of the 30-strong Swaziland Senate are elected by the people.
The Prime Minister, his deputy and all cabinet ministers are chosen by the King.
The remarks were given during the official opening of the 39th Plenary Assembly Session of the Southern Africa Development Community (SADC) Parliamentary Forum in Ezulwini.
The Times reported, “As put to the global community, the Kingdom of Eswatini’s [Swaziland’s] position is that it believes in democracy as an idea but not as an ideal because things that are ideal to you may not be ideal to other people,” the King said.’
King Mswati is presently the Deputy Chair of the SADC and will assume the chair in August 2016. n
King Mswati invented the concept of ‘Monarchical Democracy’ in 2013, when he said the idea came to him during a thunderstorm. The media and his other supporters claimed it was different from the tinkhundla system of government that already existed in the kingdom.
The King told media in Swaziland at the time this meant he would take advice from his subjects before making decisions that affected the kingdom.

His description of ‘Monarchical Democracy’ was vague, but in Swaziland, people, even journalists who purport to act on their behalf, are too scared of the King to ask him for clarification.
In fact, the ‘tinkhundla’ system of government puts all power in the hands of the monarchy. King Mswati chooses the Prime Minister, cabinet ministers, members of the judiciary, and he appoints all senior political posts in his kingdom.
When the King made his announcement about ‘Monarchical Democracy’, many people hoped this would mean a change from the present system to something approaching democracy.
But, the supine Press in Swaziland did not explain to their readers that this was not going to happen.

Instead, it took the Reuters news agency to get at the truth. It interviewed the King and asked him outright what ‘Monarchical Democracy’ was all about and what was going to change. The King replied, ‘No change really. It's just a name so people can understand.’

It was, Reuters reported, ‘merely a name change for foreign consumption’.
The news agency reported the King saying, ‘The world really doesn’t understand the tinkhundla system, but everybody can understand monarchical democracy. It’s an English name. This monarchical democracy is a marriage between the traditional monarchy and the ballot box, all working together under the monarchy.’
So, the King confirmed in his own words that ‘tinkhundla’ and ‘Monarchical Democracy’ were one and the same thing.
Reuters’ report was published worldwide, as well as on social media circulating within Swaziland. Swazi newspaper editors read the report with everyone else.
But, even though the Reuters report was published in September 2013, the Swazi newspapers continue with the fiction that ‘Monarchical Democracy’ might be something new.
See also
KING ADMITS NO CHANGE ON DEMOCRACY
NEW NAME FOR NON-DEMOCRACY
GOD TELLS KING MSWATI A HOME TRUTH