EX-KING’S MAN ATTACKS PROGRESSIVES

Musa Ndlangamandla, the former chief editor of King Mswati III’s newspapers in Swaziland, has launched an attack on the prodemocracy movement in the kingdom saying it was ‘squabbling’, ‘egocentric’ and ‘lining its own pocket’.

His attack was first published in the Sunday Independent newspaper in South Africa on 27 January 2013, and has now been circulated on the Internet by the Open Society Initiative for Southern Africa, a group that says it is ‘committed to deepening democracy, protecting human rights and enhancing good governance in the region’.

Ndlangamandla came to prominence in January 2012 when he was sacked from the Swazi Observer after he lost a power struggle with the Swazi Prime Minister Barnabas Dlamini. Ndlangamandla expected King Mswati to back him but was wrong-footed and the king sided with Dlamini, the man he had appointed Prime Minister in contravention of the Swazi Constitution. 

For more than a decade Ndlangamandla had been a trusted aide to King Mswati, travelling all over the world at the king’s side, writing his speeches and praising him to the hilt in the Observer newspapers. Ndlangamandla made it clear in his newspapers that they would never publish anything critical of the king. 

As soon as he was sacked Ndlangamandla tried to reinvent himself as a champion of democracy, saying that he was a force in the struggle for freedom in the kingdom as a friend of the prodemocracy forces and claiming he lost his job because he was too close to the king’s opponents. King Mswati rules Swaziland as sub-Saharan Africa’s last absolute monarch.

In his article Ndlangamandla claimed that prodemocracy forces had not been able to react to the financial crisis that has hit Swaziland in the past two years.

He wrote, ‘Despite support from the ANC and COSATU for their agenda for political reforms, a seemingly out-of sorts, squabbling and egocentric group of prodemocracy proponents in Swaziland was caught either napping or lining its pockets’, until the Southern African Customs Union bailed the kingdom out of its immediate financial difficulties.

However, having accused prodemocracy supporters of lining their pockets he offered no evidence to support this assertion, something editors at the Sunday Independent last month and now OSISA failed to rectify.

In his article Ndlangamandla went on to quote  Themba Masuku, the Swazi Deputy Prime Minister, saying that King Mswati was guided by the wishes of the majority concerning his kingdom’s political direction, saying there was overwhelming support for the king and his system of governance.

What he did not say was that at present all political parties are banned in Swaziland and sham elections are due later this year at a date to be announced by the king.

There are two chambers in the Swazi parliament: the House of Assembly and the Senate. Of the 65 members of the House, 10 are chosen by King Mswati and 55 are elected by the people. In the Senate, King Mswati chooses 20 of the 30 places. The other 10 are chosen by members of the House of Assembly. None are elected by the people.

The king also choses the Prime Minister and the government.

Ndlangamandla allowed Masuku to falsely say that political parties were allowed to contest the forthcoming national election. He was also allowed to say that Swaziland did not have a problem with human rights.

This flies in the face of evidence supplied by independent observers.

In 2011, the US State Department reporting on human rights in Swaziland, said, ‘The three main human rights abuses were police use of excessive force, including use of torture and beatings; a breakdown of the judiciary system and judicial independence; and discrimination and abuse of women and children.

‘Other significant human rights problems included extrajudicial killings by security forces; arbitrary arrests and lengthy pretrial detention; arbitrary interference with privacy and home; restrictions on freedom of speech, assembly, and association; prohibitions on political activity and harassment of political activists; trafficking in persons; societal discrimination against members of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) community; harassment of labor leaders; restrictions on worker rights; child labor; and mob violence.

‘In general, perpetrators acted with impunity, and the government took few or no steps to prosecute or punish officials who committed abuses.’

In its annual report on Swaziland for 2012, Amnesty International said, ‘Arbitrary and secret detentions, unlawful house arrests and other state of emergency-style measures were used to crush peaceful anti-government protests over several days [in 2011].’

See also

DEPUTY PM MISLEADS ON HUMAN RIGHTS

http://swazimedia.blogspot.com/2013/01/deputy-pm-misleads-on-human-rights.html

SACKED EDITOR IS NO HERO

http://swazimedia.blogspot.com/2012/01/sacked-swazi-editor-is-no-hero.html

DEPUTY PM MISLEADS ON HUMAN RIGHTS

Swaziland’s Deputy Prime Minister Themba Masuku has claimed that human rights and democratic principles are adhered to in the kingdom in a newspaper interview that denies evidence to the contrary amassed over several years.

He told the South African Sunday Independent this week (27 July 2013) that Swaziland adhered to 29 international and regional protocols, charters and conventions, the majority of which addressed basic human rights.

This flies in the face of evidence supplied by human rights observers.

In 2011, the US State Department reporting on human rights in Swaziland, said, ‘The three main human rights abuses were police use of excessive force, including use of torture and beatings; a breakdown of the judiciary system and judicial independence; and discrimination and abuse of women and children.

‘Other significant human rights problems included extrajudicial killings by security forces; arbitrary arrests and lengthy pretrial detention; arbitrary interference with privacy and home; restrictions on freedom of speech, assembly, and association; prohibitions on political activity and harassment of political activists; trafficking in persons; societal discrimination against members of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) community; harassment of labor leaders; restrictions on worker rights; child labor; and mob violence.

‘In general, perpetrators acted with impunity, and the government took few or no steps to prosecute or punish officials who committed abuses.’

It is also clear that in Swaziland, King Mswati who is sub-Saharan Africa’s last absolute monarch, is in complete control.

In October 2012, the kingdom’s House of Assembly passed avote of no-confidence in the government by a three-fifths majority. According to the constitution King Mswati was required (he had no discretion in the matter) to sack the Prime Minister and Government.

This he did not do, instead the king put pressure on members of parliament to run the no-confidence vote again, this time ensuring it did not pass. In this way King Mswati ensured that the government he himself handpicked stayed in power. 

On this subject the Sunday Independent quoted Masuku saying, ‘Our constitution contains a Bill of Rights. Recently some members of parliament used parts of it to push a no confidence vote on cabinet. That is democracy at play. The government did not thwart the process. It’s just that the process was flawed.’

Masuku told the newspaper that child rights legislation in Swaziland was world-class. This came two weeks after Timothy Velabo (TV) Mtetwa, one of the leading traditionalists among the king’s supporters and who is commonly known as the ‘traditional prime minister’ said it was all right for children to be taken as brides.

He said this despite a newly-enacted Children’s Protection and Welfare Act, 2012, that aims to make the practice known as kwendzisa illegal. 

Mtetwa was quoted by a local newspaper saying traditionalists would apply for a review of the Act if it was felt to collide with Swazi customs and traditions.

Masuku seems to be on a charm offensive on behalf of the Swazi ruling elite in an attempt to convince international opinion that Swaziland is a fully-fledged democracy.

This year national elections are to be held, on a date yet to be set by the king, and already international democracy watchers have concluded that they will be a fraud. 

The parliament has no powers, as evidenced by the king’s refusal to abide by the constitution and sack the government after the vote of no confidence.

The king selects the Prime Minister in contravention of the constitution which insists that the PM should be a member of the kingdom’s senate. There are two chambers of parliament, the House of Assembly and the Senate. Of the 65 members of the House, 10 are chosen by King Mswati and 55 are elected by the people. In the Senate, King Mswati chooses 20 of the 30 places. The other 10 are chosen by members of the House of Assembly. None are elected by the people.

At the last Swaziland national election in 2008, the Commonwealth Election Team, which has global experience monitoring national elections, declared that the voting was so badly flawed Swaziland needed to rewrite its constitution, if it ever wanted to ‘ensure that Swaziland’s commitment to political pluralism is unequivocal’.

The European Union declined even to send a delegation to monitor the election, declaring that it could not be free and fair if political parties were banned. In 2008 Peter Beck Christiansen, the EU Ambassador to Swaziland, told a press conference there were ‘shortcomings in the kingdom’s democracy’.

In his interview with the Sunday Independent, Masuku claimed that the pro-democracy protests that have been taking place across Swaziland over recent years had been hijacked by ‘criminals’.

He said, ‘Such clashes happen all over the world. We don’t condone it, but some protest actions are hijacked by criminals.’

But if anyone is behaving like ‘criminals’ it is the Swazi state. In its annual report on Swaziland for 2012, Amnesty International said, ‘Arbitrary and secret detentions, political prosecutions and excessive force were used to crush political protests.’

It also reported, ‘Arbitrary and secret detentions, unlawful house arrests and other state of emergency-style measures were used to crush peaceful anti-government protests over several days [in 2011].’

See also

SWAZI ELECTION ‘WILL BE A FRAUD’

http://swazimedia.blogspot.com/2013/01/swazi-election-will-be-fraud.html

SWAZILAND’S BRUTAL REGIME – AMNESTY

http://swazimedia.blogspot.com/2012/05/swazilands-brutal-regime-amnesty.html

KING PROVES CONSTITUTION IS WORTHLESS

http://swazimedia.blogspot.com/2012/10/king-proves-constitution-is-worthless.html

‘UPRISING WILL GO AHEAD DESPITE BAN’

The Sunday Independent newspaper in South Africa today (10 April 2011) published the following report ahead of Tuesday’s banned proposed protests in Swaziland.

Protest leaders say they will defy a ban on the protests.

This report appeared in the print edition of the Sunday Independent, but not online.

Uprising will go ahead despite ban
 
Swazi union leaders vow
 
 

Maureen Isaacson, Sunday Independent, Johannesburg, 10 April 2011
 
The April 12 Uprising in Swaziland will go ahead on Tuesday despite a banning order and intimidation by Prime Minister Barnabas Dlamini, and a meeting by the Swazi regime with union leaders on Friday to call an end to protests against sub-Sahara’s last remaining absolute monarchy.
 
Mduduzi Gina, the secretary-general of the Swaziland Federation of Trade Unions, said yesterday that the meeting with advisers to King Mswati III may have yielded an agreement to back down on certain socio-economic issues – such as the hike in electricity tariffs and the question of grants to the elderly.
 
“They said they would get the government to engage us on the question of cutting the salaries of civil servants. But the issue of the dissolution of the current government and its replacement by a transitional government, a move towards forming a multiparty democracy was non-negotiable,” he said.
 
He was joined by other leaders and civil society groups who said they would defy threats of force to stop the planned pro-democracy protests that would continue for three days.
 
Some protests were planned independently of the April 12 Uprising, styled on the Tunisian and Egyptian revolts, touted by “a faceless” Facebook group claiming to be “the voice of the people”, with “no political affiliations”.
 
April 12 is traditionally a day of protest by civil society. It marks the suspension of the constitution and introduction of the rule of Swaziland by royal decree 38 years ago.
 
“It will be a pity if force will be used. We have applied for permission in the sense that we have reported concerns in terms of our labour relations act. We acknowledge that Swaziland is a kingdom. Mswati may remain as a monarch, but not as an absolute monarch, absolute power corrupts absolutely. We are calling for a process of democratisation and the work towards a multiparty democracy.”
 
Vincent Ngcongwane, the secretary-general of the Swaziland Federation of Labour, joined in a call for an end to corruption, the cutting back of exorbitant pay cheques for the royal and government elites, the provision of basic necessities, grants for the elderly, free tertiary education and the provision of medication in state-owned hospitals.
 
On Friday Zodwa Mabuza, the chief executive of the Federation of Swaziland Employers, said: “We don’t know about an uprising. We heard about the uprising informally and nobody has approached us about it. The formal position we have from unions is that there will be protest action. We are concerned about the safety of business and the economy.
 
So concerned is the regime that Swaziland’s Foreign Affairs Minister Lutfo Dlamini was in Pretoria this week to speak about his country’s economic crisis and the possibility of imposing civil servant pay cuts.
 
He was reportedly looking to endorse a bailout in the event of a deepening crisis on account of the protests.
 
Maxwell Dlamini, the president of the Swaziland National Union of Students, said: “We are aware of what we want and nobody is going to stand in our way. Members of the police force as well as the army are actually oppressed and so we will mobilise them for this uprising.”
 
Lucky Lukhele, the spokesman for the Swaziland Solidarity Network, a network of activists operating from South Africa, said: “It’s now or never.”
 
He called for all progressive forces to join hands on Tuesday. He said the solidarity network “unashamedly supports the April 12 Uprising”.
 
Steve Faulkner, SA Municipal Workers’ Union international officer and co-ordinator of the South African chapter of the Swaziland Democracy Campaign (SDC), said none of the constituent organisations of the SDC – a broad-based body which represents all trade unions, faith-based bodies, civil society and human rights bodies – had aligned themselves with the uprising.
 
“The SDC firmly believes any uprising must be organic and must come from accountable organisations,” he said. “We always said the propagandising of the uprising would lead the security police to start fishing around.” This week it was reported that Nkolisi Ngcamphalana, a member of the youth wing of PUDEMO (People’s United Democratic Movement), was tortured ahead of the scheduled April 12 Uprising.
 
Today at 10am the Swaziland Democracy Campaign will bring together 40 representatives from Swaziland to link up with Cosatu and its affiliates, human rights bodies and campaign groups, to develop a new “plan of action”. The programmes of action will be unveiled at a special Swazialand Demicracy Rally at the Civic Theatre in Braamfontein.

SEX SCANDAL NEWSPAPER ‘BANNED’

The City Press newspaper that broke the story about the Swaziland Royal Family sex scandal has been banned from the kingdom – but only ‘unofficially’.

The City Press is a South African Sunday newspaper, but it is on sale in Swaziland. For the past two weeks it ran stories about an (alleged) adulterous relationship between (now former) Justice and Constitutional Affairs Minister Ndumiso Mamba, and King Mswati III’s 12^th wife, Nothando Dube (also known as Inkhosikati LaDube).

Now, reports in the African media say Swaziland security forces were apparently instructed to buy all copies of the City Press that were on sale in the kingdom.

African Eye reports, ‘“There were reports that people could not get the paper last weekend in Swaziland, and our sources...also called on Tuesday asking if we know that we have been banned,’ said City Press executive editor Japhet Ncube on Wednesday. “Our lawyers are looking into this issue and steps will probably be taken if it's true, otherwise there is no official report on this.”'

Spokesperson for the Swaziland chapter of the Media Institute of Southern Africa (MISA Swaziland), Michael Motsa, said there was no law the Swaziland authorities could use to ban City Press or any other paper.

‘“Yes, there are rumours that City Press has been banned from circulation in the kingdom, but I don't think there is any truth to that. If it is true, we will condemn this and call for the unbanning of the paper based on the fact that there is no legislation calling for banning of newspapers that report negatively about the royal family,” said Motsa on Wednesday.’ (11 August 2010).

While the royal sex scandal has not been covered in the Swaziland media, South African Sunday newspapers City Press, Sunday Sun and the Sunday Independent have reported on it.