SWAZIS WANT DEMOCRACY: SURVEY

Two thirds of Swazi people want the kingdom to become a democracy, research just published reveals.

And, they want to choose their own leaders ‘through honest and open elections’.

They also strongly disapprove of allowing King Mswati III, 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.

The findings contradict successive Swaziland Governments, which for years have claimed that ordinary Swazis were content with their political system. In September 2013, Swaziland held its national election: all political parties were banned from taking part and only 55 of the 65-member House of Assembly were elected by the people. The other 10 members were appointed by the King. No members of the 30-stong Swazi Senate are elected by the people.

King Mswati also appoints the Prime Minister and the Cabinet.

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’.

Meanwhile, 70 percent of people said they disapproved of the statement that only one political party should be allowed to stand for election and hold office, but 58 percent also said they felt political parties ‘create division and confusion’ and it was ‘unnecessary to have many political parties in Swaziland’.

Afrobarometer is an African-led network of survey researchers and analysts, working in up to 35 countries on the continent.

It states its goal is, ‘To give the public a voice in policy making processes by providing high-quality public opinion data to policy-makers, policy advocates and civil society organizations, academics, media, donors and investors, and ordinary Africans.’

SWAZI MINISTERS PAID MORE THAN PM

In Swaziland, cabinet ministers are paid more than the prime minister and his deputy. This is because of the way that personal allowances are calculated.

The Times Sunday, an independent newspaper in Swaziland, published what it called a ‘highly classified government document’ detailing the salaries and allowances.

One minister told the newspaper that cabinet ministers were paid too little and the money should be increased. The newspaper withheld his name ‘to protect him’.

The full report is published below.

SOURCE

Ministers paid E89 000 per month

MBABANE - Cabinet ministers are paid more than the Prime Minister (PM) Sibusiso Dlamini and his Deputy Themba Masuku.

Each minister earns E1 070 771 per annum or a total of E89 230.92 per month compared to the PM's E910 944 per annum, which translates to E75 912 per month.

All these amounts are inclusive of the politicians' basic salary and allowances.

According to a highly classified government document in this newspaper's possession, the ministers' total packages are higher because of the allowances they receive from government.

They are paid more than E42 000 as basic salaries but their total allowances go as high as E46 800.

The total value of their individual allowances supersedes their basic salaries.

The Prime Minister confirmed that he earned less than his ministers.

He said the disparity was a result of the fact that ministers are paid capital and car maintenance allowances.

"The PM and DPM are remunerated less than Cabinet ministers because they are housed by government, and are also provided with official vehicles," he said.

He was speaking through government spokesperson Macanjana Motsa.

Motsa also confirmed that the figures mentioned above were correct.

According to the document, ministers are paid a basic salary of E508 237 per annum while their allowances stand at E562 534 per annum.

The PM's basic salary is E635 296 per year and his allowances amount to E275 648.

The DPM is paid a total package of E836 296 per annum and E69 691 per month.

His allowances stand at E254 524 per annum.

Cabinet has agreed to take a 10 per cent cut as of April 2011.

This is being done in an effort to salvage the country's ailing economy following advice from the International Monetary Fund (IMF).

The IMF suggested that public servants earning E300 000 per annum and above should take 10 per cent salary cuts while those earning E200 000 and above should have their salaries cut by eight per cent.

Those earning below will have their pay reduced by six per cent.

Government has proposed that politicians earning less than E100 000 sacrifice 4.5 per cent of their salaries.

Government has indicated that cuts should also apply across the civil service.

The politicians' allowances were boosted by the introduction of Finance Circular No. 1 of 2010, which improved their perks.

According to the circular, ministers, the PM and his deputy are entitled to 12.5 per cent of their basic salary as constituency allowance.

Prime Minister, his deputy, minister, presiding officers and RAs are entitled to a housing loan of up to E1.5 million at a maximum of eight per cent interest for up to 10 years to be arranged by government.

The PM does not receive this money because he stays in a government house.

This allowance is also extended to presiding officers, MPs, Senators and Regional Administrators.

They are also paid an annual capital allowance of E120 000 to enable them to purchase equivalent vehicles for their private use.

They further receive E74 063 as maintenance allowance.

Meanwhile, one minister said salaries paid to ministers were too little.

The minister, whose name is withheld to protect him, said the money should be increased.

"Our salaries are far too low compared to our colleagues in the Southern Africa Development Community (SADC) region.

SAY A LITTLE PRAYER FOR SWAZILAND

Swaziland’s leaders are so inept that they have to urge Swazi people to pray for God to save the kingdom, because they don’t know how to do it themselves.

The kingdom’s leaders, who have King Mswati III, sub-Saharan Africa’s last absolute monarch as their head, have perpetrated a belief that God can save Swaziland by ‘invariably saying we need to pray for serious challenges like poverty, HIV/AIDS, economic woes, crime, abuse of women and children, road accidents and corruption’.

That’s the verdict of Innocent Maphalala, editor of the Times Sunday, an independent newspaper in Swaziland.

In a scathing attack on the leadership in Swaziland, Maphalala writes in his own newspaper today (5 December 2010), ‘We believe we can do anything to anyone and only pray for whatever consequence to evaporate into thin air.’

He goes on, ‘I am sure it is only in Swaziland where authorities advise the nation to pray when confronted with such critical issues as those listed above.

‘Elsewhere, such challenges are confronted head on with sensible policies and clear, decisive action.

‘Laws are enacted and amended on a regular basis to be in line with the times and tackle problems as they come.

‘Not here!

‘Just this past Thursday, Prime Minister [Barnabas] Sibusiso Dlamini used the prayer card when a reporter from this newspaper asked him hard questions about the Mbabane land allocation scandal.

‘He had been asked to comment on the flagrant disregard of the Crown Lands Disposal Act, 1911 when large plots were allocated to ministers and some Municipal Council of Mbabane officials – at undeserved discounts.

‘As he always does when pushed to a corner, the head of government launched into some long treatise about angels, the devil, his ministers’ right to a decent lifestyle and finally…prayer.

‘This is what he said: “The allocation was done in an angelic manner. The devil was not involved. When we got into office, we found that ministers were scattered all over the country or living in their spouses’ houses or flats. A minister needs to maintain certain standards regarding the house they live in, the location of the house and the cars they drive. We prayed when tackling this matter.”

‘Jesus Christ!’

Maphalala goes on, ‘How can anyone even think of using words like ‘angelic’ to describe this controversial and definitely illegal land sale?

‘The angels in heaven should be preparing to turn their backs on Swaziland for good after this.’

To read the full article click here.

SWAZI GVT SILENT ON EXILED ACTIVIST

The Swazi Government has denied forcing a human rights advocate to leave Swaziland.

James Mania, a political refugee from Kenya left Swaziland last week after being given an ultimatum to leave or be deported back to his home country.

According to the Times of Swaziland today (19 December 2008), when sought to comment on the circumstances leading to Mania’s leaving, ‘all the senior government officers who were implicated in the matter claimed ignorance of the issue’.

Mania was thrown out of Swaziland because he was involved in informing the international human rights watchdog Observatory for Human Rights Defenders about the violation of human rights and freedoms in the kingdom.

The Observatory alerted the international community about this and asked it to intervene in the prevailing situation in Swaziland.

Copies of the letter were also sent to the king’s office, the Prime Minister, the Ministry of Justice, the Attorney General as well as the country’s Permanent Representative to the UN.

According to the Times, police are said to have called Mania and informed him that he would be deported should he pursue this matter any further.

‘He was then forced to leave the country a few days later when the police allegedly gave him seven days to voluntarily leave the country or be deported. This was after it was alleged that the Attorney General’s office had been contacted by the United Nations (UN) Rapporteur on Human Rights about human rights violations in the country.

‘Secretary to Cabinet Sandile Ceko denied knowledge of the matter. He said he never received a letter about the issue. Ceko said if it was sent to the PM through his office, he might have sent it through without reading its contents. He stated, though that matters of human rights were normally dealt with by the Justice Ministry.

‘Justice Ministry Principal Secretary Sicelo Dlamini also said he could not recall the letter.

‘It was the same thing with Attorney General Majahenkhaba Dlamini, who denied knowledge of the matter.’

JOURNALISTS BEG FOR MINISTRY JOBS

Journalists in Swaziland are not against getting their own snouts in the trough when they can.

It is reported that many have been calling on newly appointed government ministers to offer their services as personal secretaries.

According to today’s (27 October 2008) Swazi Observer – the newspaper that is the voice of power in Swaziland and is in effect owned by the king – journalists are ‘begging’ for jobs with ministers.

‘Journalists earn around E3000 (about 375 US dollars) to E5000 per month on average, and are queuing for the “plum job” of being private secretary, which is about three times what the newsrooms are paying.

‘New ministers have confirmed that they have been inundated with job applications from journalists and drivers.

‘Each minister said he had not received less than 50 calls from people who want jobs or favours.

‘Each of the ministers will have to hire own private secretary and their driver. Usually, the country’s media is the fishing pond for the new ministers’ private secretaries job,’ the Observer reports.

The newspaper doesn’t say whether the journalists are from all sectors of the media industry or only from the Observer.

You can’t really be surprised by the journalists. Most of them in Swaziland are propaganda mouthpieces for the king, the government and those in power, so why shouldn’t they come clean about this and move right into the government offices?

SWAZI GOVERNMENT HITS ITS CRITICS

Government departments are punishing Swazi newspapers that write critical articles about them by withholding advertisements.

‘The government is the biggest single advertiser and wields enormous power in the small advertising market. Government regularly uses this power to control media content,’ it was revealed at a workshop held in Swaziland.

A panel of experts in the African Media Barometer workshop heard that censoring the news to protect advertisers has become increasingly common in Swaziland.

A report on the workshop reveals, ‘Recently the Ministry of Health ran a series of announcements in the Observer, but refused to run them in the Times. When the newspaper confronted the Ministry they said they withheld the advertisements because they were unhappy with the Times’ criticism of the Ministry over the public health crisis. The Observer has had similar experiences of government withholding advertisements on particular issues. This is not the result of top-level policy, but rather “just depends on which government department it is”’

Government departments can get away with this because the newspapers rely on advertising and a large proportion of that advertising income comes from the government. The advertising market in Swaziland is too small to sustain many media outlets. Government and parastatals are the big advertisers and if the were removed from the market, the media would barely survive. Advertising from private businesses is rare and ad hoc.

The report adds, ‘And since the government and parastatals are the biggest advertisers, this means information critical of government and public bodies can be withheld from the public.’

The workshop, which was held in July 2007, also heard that other advertisers are also protected by newspaper owners. The report states, ‘Recently the Times rejected an investigative piece that dug up dirt about a major advertiser.’ The owner of the Times made the editor shelve the article.

This kind of behaviour led the Media Institute of Southern Africa – Swaziland Chapter (MISA) to conclude that ‘media owners are more concerned about protecting their business than fighting for media freedom.’


See also

ADVERTISERS ‘CONTROL THE MEDIA’