Search This Blog

Showing posts with label Morning Star. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Morning Star. Show all posts

Monday, 4 April 2011

INSIDE MSWATI’S PERSONAL KINGDOM


The following article is taken from the Morning Star, a national daily newspaper in the UK. It describes the background to the ‘uprising’ called in Swaziland for 12 April. It also sums up the present situation in Swaziland which is ruled by King Mswati III, sub-Saharan Africa’s last absolute monarch.

Inside Mswati's personal kingdom


South African trade unionists will march through the province of Mpumalanga to the Oshoek border post with Swaziland on April 12 [2011] to demonstrate solidarity with their neighbours.
On that day, Swazis will answer the call for a peaceful uprising for democracy and an end to the autocratic regime of King Mswati III.
The Swazi people will have lived under emergency rule for exactly 38 years on the day of their uprising. It was on April 12 1973 that late king Sobhuza dismissed parliament, declared political parties illegal and banned "commoners" from participation in political activity.
He instituted the Tinkhundla system whereby the king holds absolute power but devolves decision making to a number of traditional chiefs at local level.
A new constitution, ratified by Mwati in 2005, puts the king above it and ensures his personal control of all land, tax revenue and the economy as a whole.
The English public school-educated monarch milks the country's wealth to provide luxury BMWs for himself and his 13 wives, while his subjects live in dire poverty.
Over 300,000 of the 1 million population depend on food aid, with 70 per cent living below the poverty line.
Swaziland also has the highest incidence of HIV/Aids in the world, with 40-50 per cent HIV positive and average life expectancy just 32 years.
Mass poverty and denial of democratic rights have sparked opposition led by the banned People's United Democratic Movement (Pudemo), which has had its leaders, including president Mario Masuku, regularly arrested.
Contract worker Sipho Jele, a member of the Swaziland Agriculture and Plantation Workers Union who was one of a number of Pudemo members charged - and subsequently acquitted - with high treason in 2006 for involvement in a non-existent bombing campaign was arrested during last year's May Day protests.
He was charged under the Suppression of Terrorism Act for wearing a Pudemo T-shirt under his jacket, and taken to jail.
His body was found hanging from the rafters of the toilet block three days later.
Coroner Nondumiso Simelane, a former police officer, released a verdict of suicide on March 9, ignoring evidence from the Jele family pathologist to support a homicide verdict.
Neither the coroner nor the prison authorities attempted to explain how Jele reached the beam, from which he was hanged, without any ladder or platform there.
Despite this history of brutal dictatorship, the Southern African Development Community and the Commonwealth retain Swaziland as a member in good standing.
Swazis, who are found on both sides of the border of South Africa, have a history of anti-colonial and anti-apartheid struggles and have built effective trade unions and political self-organisation.
They showed on March 18, despite widespread ongoing repression, their capacity for resistance to the parasitic and brutal monarchy.
Tens of thousands of workers, students, community bodies and religious groups flooded the streets of the capital Mbabane and the main industrial centre Manzini to say that they had had enough.
Beforehand, the Swazi army set up roadblocks and heavily armed troops were deployed prominently to try to scare people into ignoring the call to action.
Swaziland Democracy Campaign convener Mary Pais Da Silva warned that ordinary Swazis have seen the light and that "the voice of the people has spoken.
"Our message to the state is that no amount of brutality shall deter us from our goal. Multiparty democracy is the only answer and Swaziland is en route there."
Cosatu hailed the bravery of the Swazi people, saying: "Today, workers, students and people of Swaziland declared their right to a life of dignity and equality. "They demanded that they be heard. They called for solidarity and global action now. We salute them."
From Britain, Unite expressed "its strong solidarity with the people of Swaziland on this momentous day."
The union declared full support for the campaign for real democracy, adding: "The call for international solidarity that we have heard from our sister and brother trade unionists and the entire Swaziland Democracy Campaign is one that we unreservedly respond to."
Cosatu convened a meeting in Pretoria last week with the intention of building international consensus on the need to promote change in Swaziland.
The union federation's president Sidumo Dlamini pointed out that Swaziland is heavily dependent on South Africa, which provides 90 per cent of its imports and 60 per cent of its exports.
Its currency is pegged to the South African rand.
The Tinkhundla regime depends heavily on the Southern African Customs Union and worker remittances from South Africa to fund the royal family's lavish and ostentatious consumption.
Dlamini questioned why the South African government was not being more decisive over Swaziland, declaring: "If our government can pull the plug, Swaziland can come to a standstill."
A similar question could be posed to the British government, which sees fit to lecture the world on democratic norms but sees nothing to criticise in its own former colony.
As the South Africa-based Swaziland Solidarity Network spokesman Lucky Lukhele said this week, "Swazis are not asking for something that the rest of southern Africa does not already have - a democratic government founded on the principles of equality and the right to self-governance."

Sunday, 19 September 2010

SWAZI RIGHTS: READ ALL ABOUT THEM

No matter how much the Swaziland Government wants to keep the world in ignorance of the human rights abuses in the kingdom, the truth is getting out.


At the start of the recent Global Week of Action for democracy in Swaziland, two Associated Press reporters were turned away at the border with South Africa. The clear intention of the Swazi regime, headed by King Mswati III, sub-Saharan Africa’s last absolute monarch, was to try to stop reporting of the protests reaching the international community.


The Swazi regime failed miserably. Over the past two weeks international media have been full of reports about Swaziland, exposing the harsh regime in the kingdom and the way that the Swazi state tries to stifle legitimate protest.


Here is a summary of some of the more interesting articles. Click on the media name to go to the full articles. Also, on Friday (17 September 2010) I posted a report from CBC in Canada that is worth a listen if you haven’t already done so.


The Economist magazine in a report headed The king is good for the tourists, much less so for his people contrasts the image of the ‘pretty little mountainous kingdom’ that is sold to tourists with the reality of a state where ‘political parties are banned, critics are systematically arrested and beaten up by police and freedom of expression is severely curtailed’.


It says, ‘As wars of liberation raged around it in the 1980s, this former British protectorate gained a reputation as an island of peace in a sea of regional conflict. And that is the way the government wants to keep things, come what may. The prime minister has even threatened to bring back the bastinado, a form of torture where a person’s feet are beaten with a cane or a rod, to deal with pesky dissidents and interfering foreigners. “There is peace,” Mduduzi Gina, head of the Swaziland Federation of Trade Unions, concedes, “but it’s not real peace if every time there is dissent, you have to suppress it. It’s like sitting on top of a boiling pot.”’


‘Over the past few years the oppression has been getting worse. Yet no country seems willing to take up the Swazis’ case. They feel most aggrieved about South Africa’s silence. After all, they gave refuge to the African National Congress during its liberation struggle. Why can’t it return the favour now? Because, it is whispered, South Africa’s president, Jacob Zuma, received money from King Mswati during his campaign to oust former president Thabo Mbeki. Mr Zuma is also still officially engaged to one of the king’s nieces. And South Africa wants Swaziland’s support to get itself elected back onto the UN Security Council next month.’


Business Day, South Africa, questions why the South African government was silent over the violence meted out by Swazi police to South African citizens during the protests in Swaziland.


Loyiso Langeni commented in the newspaper, ‘This is in stark contrast to the swiftness with which SA would react in condemning human rights abuses in regions such as the Middle East, western Sahara and Rwanda.


‘SA recently recalled its highest ranking diplomatic representatives to Israel and Rwanda in protest against human rights abuses there. This is the strongest action a government can take short of cutting all ties with another country.’


Langeni goes on, ‘Yet several attempts by Business Day last week to get a comment from the ministry on the suppression of political parties and human rights abuses in Swaziland were met with silence. This raises the question of whether SA considers the aspirations of the Swazi s for a free and democratic dispensation as not deserving the same attention as those in Palestine and the Morocco-invaded western Sahara region.’


Langeni concludes, ‘SA is vocal about its enviable track record of a being a progressive, human-rights centred nation. Is it not time that SA, as the most powerful and influential country in the region, extends this culture to neighbouring Swaziland?’


The Morning Star, UK, carried an article that has also appeared in a number of other publications by Mike Marqusee, in which he writes, ‘Swaziland is a small country with a big problem. The 1.1 million inhabitants of the land-locked southern African kingdom live under the thumb of one of the world's last absolute monarchies, a venal and repressive regime whose plunder of the country is systematic and comprehensive.’


Elsewhere, Mario Masuku, of the banned People’s United Democratic Movement (PUDEMO) spoke to the Voice of America (VoA). He said the Swazi people’s demand for democratic change and the rule of law will not be silenced by government threats.


He was interviewed after Swaziland’s illegally-appointed Prime Minister Barnabas Dlamini said his government will consider punishing political dissidents by beating their feet with spikes.


Dlamini also warned that foreigners who interfere in the country’s internal politics will face the same punishment.


VoA reports that analysts said that, although a constitution was reintroduced in 2006, the level of power invested in King Mswati III is so significant that the country can be considered an absolute monarchy.


Despite the constitution, the king holds executive, legislative and judicial power.


Critics say the government has successfully stifled political opposition by putting pressure on human rights organizations, trade unions, and civil society groups and banning all political parties.

Saturday, 9 May 2009

BAD NEWS FOR SWAZILAND'S KING

Unsurprisingly, King Mswati III of Swaziland has ignored calls from democrats in South Africa not to attend the inauguration of Jacob Zuma as president of South Africa today (9 May 2009).


Calls have come from trade unions, civil society and at least one political party for the king not to be invited because he is the last absolute monarch in sub-Saharan Africa and there is no democracy in Swaziland where political parties are banned, parliament has very few real powers and the king makes all the important decisions.


The Swazi Observer, the newspaper in effect owned by the king, reported yesterday that the king is ‘not worried’ about calls from the Congress of South African Trade Unions (COSATU) for the boycott of the king and his entourage.


The Observer showed itself to be no more than a propaganda sheet for the king when it stated in what purported to be a news story, ‘COSATU, which is not new to meddling in Swaziland’s affairs and rubble-rousing about border blockades, released a statement to media outlets including the South African Press Association (SAPA) making unsubstantiated and disparaging remarks about the Swazi delegation.’


The Observer quoted Bheki Dlamini, Chief Officer in the King’s Office, saying, that the country’s activities and movements are not dictated to by COSATU or its ilk.


It went on in similar vein when it said ‘Minister of Justice and Constitutional Affairs Lutfo Dlamini lamented that COSATU and its ilk were relying on lies, hearsay and deliberate distortion of facts by elements that are against the peace and progress in Swaziland.’


And so on and so on. King Mswati and the Observer can huff and puff all they want but opinion internationally is against the king’s visit to South Africa. The line being taken is that as dictator in his own kingdom, he has no place at the inauguration of a man who was democratically elected.


South African newspapers, in particular, have been reporting opposition to the king’s visit. Among reports that I saw are from the Star, the Sowetan, the Independent, the Cape Times and the Dispatch.


Opposition has carried beyond South Africa. The international news agency AFP,
The Morning Star, UK, AllAfrica.com and the Tribune of India have also reported on the opposition.


Meanwhile, news comes through that the regular Friday protests for democracy in Swaziland that have been taking place at the Swazi embassy in Pretoria, South Africa, since February are gathering strength. At least 100 people turned up yesterday even though it is reported that King Mswati tried to put pressure on South African authorities to have it stopped. A South African court declared the protest legal and it went ahead.


The king seems to have forgotten where he is. He gets away with turning his state police on progressives in Swaziland but he can’t get away with it in a democracy.