US NOT TO FUND SWAZI FREEDOM FIGHT

A deep black cloud of mystery hangs over a report that Freedom House of the United States is to give ‘unlimited’ funding to progressive groups in Swaziland to help the fight for democracy.

As I wrote yesterday (6 May 2009), the Times of Swaziland Sunday edition reported Musa Hlophe, the coordinator of the Swaziland Coalition of Concerned Organisations (SCCCO), saying the money would be channelled through his NGO and would be made available to groups such as the Swaziland United Democratic Front (SUDF).

It was a great story and, I said, it showed the Americans were truly committed to advancing democracy in Swaziland. There’s only one problem: it’s not happening. Or as SCCCO said in a media release: Quite simply untrue. Exaggerations of the grossest nature. There are no unlimited funds.

SCCCO says, ‘The facts are these: The Coalition has been working with Freedom House on capacity building of its staff and some of its members and partners. This has entailed a series of interviews and workshops in various parts of the country. The support was practical rather than financial and at no stage has funding been transferred from Freedom House to the Coalition. While we hope to continue the Partnership at present, funding has not been found to do so. We would like to place on record our gratitude for the support from Freedom House.’

It is disappointing that more isn’t being done to help, but how is it that the activities between SCCCO and Freedom House were reported in the way they were? The Times Sunday had an interview with Musa Hlophe and according to the newspaper he told them funds were on the way.

How was there such a complete breakdown in communication between SCCCO and the newspaper?

The conspiracy theorists are out in force. According to Hlophe, ‘A rumour has been started by those who object to civil society playing a positive role in the development of the country.’ He went on to say that suggestions made in the Times Sunday report that some of the funds would go to banned organisations such as the People’s United Democratic Front (PUDEMO) were ‘mischief making of the highest order’.

Other theories doing the rounds on the Internet are that the Times was pressured into printing a false story after it got in trouble with King Mswati III over his purchase of armoured cars; that the ruling regime thought it would encourage infighting over cash at the SUDF; and there are even doubts about SCCCO’s account of the incident.

I don’t think they’ve got it right. As an academic who has studied the media in Swaziland face on I know that many individuals and organisations are not very good at expressing what they mean (read Hlophe’s regular column in the Times Sunday to see what I mean). Add to this the fact that reporters often misunderstand what is being said to them. Then, because in Swaziland, there is no culture of questioning, reporters tend not to seek clarification. The result: confusion.

Not so much conspiracy then just a good old cock-up. Probably.

US FUNDS FIGHT FOR SWAZI FREEDOM

The Americans seem to be true to their word when the Swazi Ambassador said the United States would support groups that are campaigning for democracy in the kingdom.

News comes this week that ‘unlimited’ funding is to be made available to what the kingdom’s only independent newspaper, the Times of Swaziland, calls ‘progressives and members of civil society’ to assist in projects designed to ‘liberate’ the kingdom. Issues around the rule of law, gender issues and giving voice to the voiceless are thought to be priorities.

According to the Times, the organisations receiving funding will be able to mobilise support of people at grassroots level all over Swaziland.

The funding will be managed by the Swaziland Coalition of Concerned Civic Organisation (SCCCO) and issues around the rule of law, gender and giving a voice to the voiceless will be priorities..

The funding comes through a partnership between SCCCO and Freedom House, a donor organisation based in the US that describes itself as ‘a non-profit, nonpartisan organization [that] is a clear voice for democracy and freedom around the world’.

According to Musa Hlophe, SCCCO coordinator, the funding will be used by non-government organisations, such as the Swaziland United Democratic Front, which has members including organisations deemed to be ‘terrorist’ organisations by Barnabas Dlamini, the illegally-appointed Prime Minister of Swaziland. These are the People’s United Democratic Movement (PUDEMO) and the Swaziland Youth Congress (SWAYOCO).

Hlophe told the Times that Freedom House was very practical and wanted people to work and not host endless fruitless meetings.

He said the organisation had pledged an unlimited amount of funds to be used in various projects for the kingdom’s struggle. He said the funding has no cap and there is an unlimited pool of funds waiting.

The move follows the announcement by Maurice Parker, the US Ambassador to Swaziland, in January 2009 that the US Embassy would support pressure groups to ensure that democracy is fulfilled in Swaziland. He said many pressure groups had trouble organising meetings, ensuring freedom of speech, or pursuing the right to assembly freely. He promised he would work with government and all pressure groups to ensure that the bottlenecks to free expression, freedom of association and full political determination are realised in Swaziland.

Swaziland is presently ruled by King Mswati III, sub-Saharan Africa’s last absolute monarch, political parties are banned, parliament has very few real powers and the king makes most of the important decisions in the kingdom.

CLARIFICATION. The SCCCO released a media statement denying that unlimited funds were to be made available by Freedom House. See US NOT TO FUND SWAZI FREEDOM FIGHT

A WINDOW IN SWAZILAND

US Ambassador to Swaziland Maurice Parker got in hot water with the Swazi Government last month (January 2009) when he said his embassy would support pressure groups campaigning for democracy in the kingdom.

To put it crudely, he was told to mind his own business by Swazi Foreign Minister Lutfo Dlamini.

I doubt very much that we’ve heard the last from Ambassador Parker or his American colleagues.

He has clearly unsettled the non-democratic regime in Swaziland and this window display at the US information centre library in Mbabane, the capital of Swaziland, won’t make them any happier.

I haven’t seen Lutfo Dlamini’s library card so I can’t report that he was among the first people to check out the two books on display (Democracy, The Right to Strike).

Picture source: The Language Business

SWAZILAND NEEDS FREE INFORMATION

Activists for democracy in Swaziland want to put freedom of information in the kingdom back on the agenda.

And they are considering writing their own draft parliamentary bill on the subject if the Swazi Government doesn’t put forward its own bill.

This emerged at the end of a week in which US-based lawyer Kevin Goldberg was in Swaziland advocating for freedom of information.

Goldberg, who was invited by the US Embassy in Swaziland, held a series of meetings in the kingdom to talk about the benefits that would come with a freedom of information law.

Talks about freedom of information legislation in Swaziland are not new. In 2007 a draft bill was drawn up at the invitation of the Swaziland Government by a consultant sent by the Commonwealth. A stakeholders’ meeting was held in March 2007 to discuss the bill, but no progress has been made since.

I have written before that there is no real commitment to freedom of information by the Swaziland Government. Swaziland is not a democracy and the kingdom’s rulers prefer to tell people as little as they can get away with. The culture in Swaziland is one of deference and generally people do not question those in authority over them, so there has been very little impetus from the grassroots for change.

The fact that there has been no progress on freedom of information legislation since March 2007 would come as no surprise to observers of Swaziland. This is a kingdom where those in authority like to pretend to the international community that democratic change is on the way. When the time comes for action, not much happens. You only need to remember that it took about 10 years for the Swaziland Constitution to be written – and even then the Swazi ruling elite had to be dragged kicking and screaming to the drafting table. Once enacted, the ruling elite has largely ignored the provisions of the constitution.

At one meeting that I attended with Goldberg and others this week a lot of time was taken up discussing whether the draft that the stakeholders discussed in March 2007 was a ‘bill’ or merely a ‘consultation paper’. The fact that the document clearly had ‘BILL’ written on it did not seem to matter. It probably doesn’t matter much to you and me either, but in the bureaucratic swamp that is Swaziland such things matter a great deal.

There would be a number of benefits to people in Swaziland if the kingdom had freedom of information legislation that required the government to level with the people and tell them what is going on.

In the recent past the press in Swaziland – largely the Nation magazine and the Times of Swaziland group – have been pressing to find out information from government. Among the topics that interest them are the scandal over awarding of government tenders, the ‘heifer scandal’ in which beasts were bought by government at hugely inflated prices, the cost of drugs for hospitals in Swaziland, the costs of the 40/40 celebrations later this year (2008), the expense to the taxpayer of running the Swazi Royal Family, the E30 million (more than 4 million US dollars) that is in the private bank account of an unnamed cabinet minister and the inflated costs of military equipment that is being purchased ahead of the 40/40 celebrations.

It is highly unlikely that we shall get to the bottom of these scandals without a freedom of information law. And it is precisely because those in power don’t want us to know the answers that the government will not truly support such a law.

Which brings me back to the democracy activists. Their frustration at the lack of progress by government has forced them to consider writing their own bill and perhaps presenting it to parliament as a private members bill.

Some people are already saying this is too difficult a task. I don’t think so, but to be done successfully there needs to be a change of mindset. The previous ‘bill’ was foisted on Swaziland by a consultant. She came to the kingdom with the document already written and simply asked ‘stakeholders’ what they thought about it. Not surprisingly the general answer she got was, ‘not much’.

To be successful the bill must be written from the ground up. We need to find out from all interested parties (not only media houses) what they think needs to be in a freedom of information bill. Only then should a document be written. This requires a fully participatory approach, something that is unheard of in Swaziland where ‘consultation’ consists of somebody in power saying ‘this is what we are going to do, what do you think about it?’

At the moment the activists are worried that to bring people together would be difficult and costly to organise. There is probably some truth in this, but if we really want to make some progress on this legislation, this has to be done.

As a first step I suggest that all those organisations that are interested in the possibility of a new bill should go out and talk about it. The media houses, NGOs, the US Embassy and others should (in NGO-speak) ‘sensitise their constituencies’ to the benefits of freedom of information. Once it can be demonstrated that there is genuine interest in getting legislation, I’m sure a donor organisation can be persuaded to put up the cash.

See also
SWAZI PEOPLE HAVE NO RIGHT TO KNOW
FREEDOM OF INFORMATION FIGHT
RIGHT TO KNOW DAY