SWAZI CHILD ABUSE – TRUE ACCOUNT

One in three children in Swaziland is sexually abused. This news came out in April 2008 and I wrote about it at the time. The Swazi media gave some coverage to the report from the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) that contained the statistic and then moved on to other stories.

This is a great pity because the report on child abuse is shocking and is an indictment of Swazi ‘culture’. Large numbers of the abused children were raped by their own fathers or other family members (75 percent of the perpetrators of sexual violence were known to the victim).

I think one of the reasons why the Swazi media have not made more of the news of child sex abuse is that journalists in Swaziland are not very good at telling stories. The coverage in April was based on an official report and a media release that accompanied it.

Journalists have little skill (and possibly little inclination) to explain further what a human tragedy such statistic reveals. It is only by getting behind the statistic and explaining what child sex abuse means in human terms that readers can begin to understand the true consequences of such abuse to the victims.

All of which brings me to the latest edition of Kaleidoscope magazine, a relatively new publication in Swaziland that comes out once every two months.

Its current edition (July/August 2008) contains an account of a young woman (now aged 18 years) who, along with her two sisters, was systematically abused by her father. All girls gave birth to babies as a result of their rapes by their father.

Kaleidoscope interviews the girl who describes in minute detail her experiences at the hands of her abusive father. As I said earlier, Swazi journalists are not good at story-telling, but Kaleidoscope shows how it should be done. The article simply allows the girl to tell her own story in her own words. The girl’s account is ‘dramatic’ enough and requires (and receives) no embellishment from the writer.

Swazi journalists are fond of telling readers that something is ‘shocking’ or ‘horrific’ even when it isn’t really. Kaleidoscope avoids telling readers what to think and allows them to make up their own minds. There is also a refreshing lack of moralising in the account. Again, readers can make up their own minds about what they think of the sex abuser.

Below is an extract from the Kaleidoscope article. Some readers may find its contents distressing. I am sure it is no comfort to you to learn that this extract is quite mild compared to some parts of the article that I am not reproducing.

‘When I was five years old, often before I left for school my mother would be comforting my two sisters who would be crying after coming out from my father’s bedroom where he had raped them. My sisters would scream from inside the bedroom and mother would hear their cries but continue with whatever she was doing whilst tears flowed down her face. When she was comforting them she would say she is sorry that father had to punish them this way but they should know she is ‘trying’ to help them. She warned them not to run away because they would suffer worse if they did so, as they would be eaten by wild animals.

‘One of my sisters stabbed herself on the stomach one day after emerging from an ordeal with father. She was pregnant and she would complain that she does not want the baby. At first she tried running away but the police found her and brought her back home. Father gave her a thorough beating and that’s when she decided to commit suicide. After she stabbed herself, father ordered her locked up and not given food, still punishing her. She died two days later and we buried her around the same week, without reporting to the police. Then the abuse turned on me.

‘I remember mother ordering me to take food to father who was in the bedroom. She said father had sweets for a child who listens to him. When I got to the room, he said we should share the food and I ate not knowing what would follow. He embraced me and lay me on the bed. He pushed up my dress and raped me.’

The child was so badly injured by the rape that she was unable to walk.

The rapes continued for years and eventually her parents banned her friends from visiting the house. When the child and her sister screamed in pain during the rapes, neighbours were told the children were being punished by their father.

In time the child had three babies and her sister at least one baby by her father.

Eventually, police arrived at the family home to arrest the father for the rape of a six-year-old girl in the neighbourhood. The mother fell sick and died at about this time.

‘Mother’s funeral was more than just a funeral it was judgement day. The whole family turned against us thinking we were framing our father for incest. Nobody believed us when we said father had sexually abused us and that our babies were his children. Our only witness was dead and it was hard to prove. Some community members who had suspected the situation at home supported our tale including our mother’s best friend who said our mother did tell her what was going on.’

Police said there was not enough evidence to prosecute the father so he was allowed home.

However, police took the sisters to a half-way home for abused children and their babies were taken to an orphanage.

The father remarried and raped his second wife’s seven-year-old child. He was prosecuted and is now serving a 26-year jail sentence.

The sisters are still at the half-way house receiving counselling.

Kaleidoscope is published by Knotell in Swaziland.

See also
TRUE HORROR OF SWAZI GIRLS’ LIVES

SOLIDARITY WITH SWAZILAND

As I wrote yesterday (11 August 2008) the Zimbabwe and Swaziland Solidarity Conference was held earlier this week.

It attracted civil society organizations from South Africa, Zimbabwe and Swaziland and was organised by the Congress of South African Trade Unions (COSATU).

The conference reasserted its commitment to strive for a transition to democracy in both Zimbabwe and Swaziland.

Here (because I don’t suppose you’ll hear much of this in the Swazi media) is the final declaration from the conference. I have edited out the part that was specifically about Zimbabwe to concentrate on the Swazi meat.

Given the present environment of fear and oppression that obtains in both Zimbabwe and Swaziland, we declare the following:

On Swaziland

We are cognisant of Swaziland having the oldest state of emergency in the region, with all public institutions and decision-making the monopoly and sole preserve of the royal family, with no democratic elections, systemic and institutionalised corruption and state terror against political and worker activists, founded on the basis of the 1973 king’s decree that concentrated all power in the hands of the monarchy. The years of convenient silence on Swaziland have promoted a culture of impunity and disregard for the fundamentals of democracy in the whole region.

We further note the deepening political and socio-economic crisis, as well as the protracted political impasse which has not been resolved by the new constitution promulgated in 2005, which itself is a product of an illegitimate process and royal imposition, Swaziland civil society congregated under the banner of the Swaziland United Democratic Front affirms the following demands:

1. Multi Party democratic Elections: The continued denial of political space, particularly the ban on multiparty politics and the right to participate in public institutions of decision-making, remains a denial of a core tenet of democracy and flies in the face of the SADC Mauritius Principles governing elections.

2. The Unbanning of Political Parties: The continued banning of political parties which was initially authored by the King’s proclamation to the Nation of 1973 has since been validated by the new constitution promulgated in 2005.

3. The return of Political Exiles: Although continually denied by the state, several Swazis remain in exile for fear of persecution by the state.

4. The evolution of a truly representative national dialogue or national convention which will result in a truly democratic constitution which will be a true representation of the people of Swaziland: The current constitution remains illegitimate as it was unilaterally driven without the critical input of Swazi stakeholders.

5. End to the cancerous corruption and greed: The royal family has entrenched a deep culture of cancerous corruption and greed in Swazi society, with the state institutions permanently ingrained in pervasive corruption that eats away the social fibre of Swazi society. A huge part of the budget is corroded by perpetual corruption and greed, which is led by the ruling minority, particularly in a country where almost 70% live on international food aid and which is almost a world leader in suffering the devastating effects of HIV/AIDS

We also note and welcome recent positive developments on the side of the oppressed and struggling people of Swaziland. Most notable is the formation of Swaziland United Democratic Front (SUDF), which brings together all progressive forces and further unites all the people in struggle for democracy and social change.

We further note the joint celebration of May Day by all worker organisations and trade unions in the country, for the first time in the history of the country, sending a clear statement that the time for the people to act together has come and that the people will resist all attempts at disuniting them.

To that end the following goals of the Swazi struggle remain the key guide:

* Creation of a new and democratic constitution that derives its legitimacy from the will of the people.

* Building and institutionalisation of the culture of democracy, the rule of law and accountability.

* Democratisation of traditional institutions to serve the needs of the people and respond accordingly to the desire of the people to be free and prosperous.

* Full recognition of the rights and responsibilities of civil society, and its independent right to exist and act freely from any form of state influence and control, including royal patronage.

These require that we ensure that we:

* Work to raise of the profile of the Swazi struggle consistently.

* Actively mobilise resources for the democratic forces to build their capacity.

* Build a solidarity movement throughout the world to popularize the struggle.

* Mobilise the Diaspora to participate in the struggle.

The Mswati regime rules without the mandate and will of the people. If in Swaziland, Mswati’s claim to natural and divine right to rule is the automatic ticket to permanent self-imposition of his interests, in Zimbabwe, Mugabe’s liberation credentials and wild claims give him the right to the same status.

These false assumptions elevate these two regimes to levels above scrutiny and accountability, not only in their own countries or to their own people, but to the world community of civilised conduct. This is why institutions of global and regional governance, have not acted with the required amount of decisiveness expected of them in confronting these rogues for such a long time.

Programme of action: Affirming the certainty of democratic victory in Zimbabwe and Swaziland through intensified struggle

1. SADC heads of state summit - March for democracy in Zimbabwe and Swaziland

The coming summit of heads of states to be held in Johannesburg on 16-17 August 2008 provides both an opportunity and space for civil society to clearly make an unequivocal statement to the leaders of the region that things cannot go on as usual. A new sense of urgency must begin to define the new SADC in the making. We have, for a long time now, allowed the wound of conveniently ignored illegitimate and undemocratic regimes to fester and begin to affect the entire fibre of the region

In this regard, we hold dear the firm view that Robert Mugabe and Mswati III are not legitimate leaders of their various countries. They cannot claim any amount of legitimacy to rule their countries, for they have not been democratically elected by the peoples of their countries.

Therefore, as representatives of civil society we condemn the behaviour of these two leaders and take it upon ourselves to expose them and their unacceptable behaviour before the eyes of the world. In this regard, we hereby resolve to hold a massive march, indeed a show of strength and conviction on the 16^th August, during the SADC heads of states summit at the Sandton Convention Centre in South Africa. In this regard, we shall be working together with broad network of social forces opposed to the evil acts of these rogue regimes and committed to the objectives of democracy.

Together, we commit ourselves to:

* Organise workers, civil society organisations, religious institutions, social movements and all progressive forces to support and actively participate in the campaign, particularly the 16 August march.

* Broaden and widen the network of forces in solidarity with the oppressed and struggling people of Zimbabwe and Swaziland, so as to isolate the Mswati and Mugabe regimes.

* Put in place a sustained massive publicity campaign popularising the plight, issues and demands of the suffering people of Zimbabwe and Swaziland, in order to expose the terrible conditions in these countries.

* Organise all possible resources, transport and all means necessary for the success of the campaign.

* Ensure that the campaign is the beginning of a sustainable solidarity offensive against the Mugabe and Mswati regimes, which should include targeted sanctions against these corrupt elites and their families, who feed on the desperate plight of their people. We have created a SADC Campaign Co-ordinating Committee comprised of two representatives each from Zimbabwe and Swaziland, and convened by COSATU and members of the South African Co-ordinating Committee for the SADC campaign, to lead the organization of this activity.

* Identify progressive governments in the region and work with them to speak out and isolate all acts of political discord and failure to adhere to the fundamental provisions of democratic instruments.

* Fiercely oppose the election of Swaziland to Chair the SADC Organ troika for politics, defence and security co-operation, for its failure to be exemplary and deserving of such a recognition.

2. Building a regional solidarity movement for democracy in Zimbabwe and Swaziland

We seek to build a regional solidarity movement, based on the proud traditions of militant struggle, popular activism and consistently progressive mobilization of workers and the poor against all forms of attacks on the people.

We commit ourselves to the creation of an effective momentum for sustained boycott of goods destined for Zimbabwe and Swaziland throughout the region, with the trade union movement taking an active lead.

All workers must refuse to serve Mugabe and Mswati, as well as their close associates and collaborators, anywhere in the region, so as to ensure that they indeed feel the heat of isolation.

We seek to co-ordinate all efforts underway to contribute towards a lasting solution to the deepening crisis in the two countries, whilst also remaining very vigilant to potential crisis situations in the region.

We shall work with regional institutions, particularly SATUCC, the SADC Council of NGOs and the Fellowship of Christian Councils in Southern Africa to create an advanced infrastructure for sustained solidarity work.

We call for the transformation of SADC in order to deepen democratic participation, enhance its responsive capacity and deepen its strategic relevance to the dynamics of the region and its capacity to serve the people more effectively, particularly as regards monitoring the adherence of its member states to its protocols and commitments.

We seek to take the leading effort and struggle on matters affecting the people of our region, hence our call to all supporters of our cause to:

* Work with us in enhancing our capacity to carry out that objective with the vigour and capacity required of us, which should assist us overcome dangers of fragmentation, poor co-ordination, strategic disharmony and even competition amongst all forces working for change in the region.

* Support activities of progressive organizations inside Zimbabwe and Swaziland to enhance their capacity to wage the struggle in conditions of extreme hostility.

* Support the call by the Swaziland United Democratic Front, a coalition of all progressive forces inside Swaziland, for concrete solidarity action in their coming activities on the 3-4 September against the extravagant 40/40 royal bash in conditions of grinding poverty and the coming royal elections in conditions of banned political parties, intensified police brutality and state terror.

Conclusion

Today we express a hope that the long journey to emancipate the citizens of both Swaziland and Zimbabwe is near its end. Although we face numerous challenges, we believe that a commitment to the principles which have guided us in our struggle for democracy will lead to a resolution of the current political impasse obtaining in the two countries. We therefore urge all SADC citizens to join us in our efforts to realize a just and democratic society, not only in Zimbabwe and Swaziland, but throughout the entire region. Let us continue fighting for our freedom, democracy and co-prosperity, underpinned by progressive development paradigms founded on the basis of a redistributive system.

Patrick Craven (National Spokesperson)

Congress of South African Trade Unions

1-5 Leyds Cnr Biccard Streets

Braamfontein, 2017

P.O. Box 1019

Johannesburg, 2000

SOUTH AFRICA

Tel: +27 11 339-4911/24

Fax: +27 11 339-5080/6940/ 086 603 9667

Cell: 0828217456

E-Mail: patrick@cosatu.org.za

IN MOURNING FOR SWAZI DEMOCRACY

Swazi King Mswati III has decreed that nobody is allowed to wear mourning gowns until the 40/40 celebrations to mark his 40th birthday and also the 40th anniversary of Swaziland’s independence from Great Britain next month are over.

Jim Gama, the ‘traditional’ prime minister of Swaziland, made this announcement last week. Gama is unelected to the post and should not be confused with Swaziland’s ‘official’ prime minister Themba Dlamini who is also unelected to his post.

According to the Swazi Observer (7 August 2008) ‘Gama said by removing the gowns, people will be showing respect to the Swazi nation as it will be marking the 40/40 double celebrations.’

With impeccable logic, Gama is quoted saying ‘removing the gowns did not mean that widows were not in mourning’. However he announced, ‘During these celebrations no one should be seen wearing any mourning gowns.’

The 40/40 celebrations are hugely controversial in Swaziland. It is estimated that they will cost upwards of E25 million (about 3.5 million US dollars). The independent media in Swaziland have criticised their cost at a time when 70 percent of Swaziland’s population live in abject poverty, earning less than one US dollar a day.

Only on Wednesday (6 August 2008) I wrote that a United Nations Development Programme report reckoned nearly four out of 10 people in Swaziland face starvation.

An invitation to Zimbabwean despot Robert Mugabe to attend the 40/40 celebrations has also caused outrage among progressive circles in Swaziland.

Now, the autonomous monarch King Mswati III has ruled that no one can wear mourning gowns until his celebration is over. This is to show respect to the nation.

I’ve got a better idea. Everyone in Swaziland who hates the idea of the 40/40 celebrations should wear mourning gown until they are over. This way we can mourn the lack of democracy in Swaziland and draw attention to fact that these celebrations have no respect for the ordinary people in the kingdom.

See also
40/40 CELEBRATION
FOUR IN TEN SWAZIS FACE STARVATION

SWAZI CELEBRATIONS CONDEMNED

Hot on the heels of my post earlier today (11 August 2008) containing news you’ll never get to hear from the Swazi media here’s another example.

This one is a press release from the Swaziland Solidarity Network (SSN) about the forthcoming elections and the 40/0 celebrations to mark the 40th birthday of King Mswati III and the 40th anniversary of the Swaziland’s independence from Great Britain.

Here it is in full.

On September 6, the Swazi regime, will celebrate the King's birthday together with Swazi Independence Day. These celebrations are financed in millions of public resources notwithstanding that the King holds in access of $200 million in personal bank accounts (see the World's Richest Royals-Forbes.com where Mswati is ranked World 14th ).

SSN strongly condemns both celebrations, for both are of no benefit to the majority of impoverished Swazis. This is typical nature of dictators who celebrate with these extravagance parties while their people are suffering. Let us remind ourselves that half of Swazi population lives of HIV/AIDS, three quarter are living on or below the bread line. This same dictatorial monarchy bans democratic political parties whose aim is to democratise and deliver essential services to the poor. How then can Swazis celebrate this false independence and the birthday of a dictatorship monarchy?

September 19 Sham Elections

The SSN condemns the sham elections of Sept. 19, 2008. The King appoints one third of the parliament with the Prime Minister – clearly this is a useless elections creating a toothless parliament, since executive, judicial and legislative authority is vested in the King. It is an elections based on individual candidates standing while political parties remain banned and freedom of speech and association remains banned and suppressed.

These individual candidates must then ask permission from and be approved by the local chief to contest elections. The nominations has to happen in the chiefs home. Clearly, only those candidates who are supporting this dictatorship and corruption will be allowed to stand by the chief.

The electoral body in charge of the sham elections is handpicked by the King. He has appointed people who are not qualifying to be on the board and only those who support his dictatorship. There is no true democracy in this sham elections – it betrays all SADC, UN and AU protocols on true democratic elections.

PROTEST NOTICE

The SSN and PUDEMO External Region will hold two demonstrations:

1) Sept. 6 at the Swazi Embassy in Pretoria

2) Sept 19 The Day of Swazi Sham Elections.

PETITION to SADC

We have also sent SADC an urgent petition to deal with the Swazi Crisis. The petition will also be attached to this Press Release.

Conclusion

We call on the media, SADC, African Union, United Nations reps in Southern Africa to condemn the sham Swazi elections. We further note bomb blasts in Swaziland that were reported in Swazi Media.

This points to a recipe for full conflict that will escalate and spill over into SADC region, already wrestling with the Zimbabwean conflict. Unless real pressure is put upon Mswati to change, he will continue to take Swaziland into poverty and conflict. Let us not waste precious time in condemning this undemocratic regime in our backyards and push for real change.

Issued by The Swaziland Solidarity Network [SSN]

For more information contact

Lucky Lukhele

[SSN] spokesperson

Mobile: 072 502 4141

Tell: 011 339 3621

Fax: 011 339 4244

Email: ssnnetwork@gmail.com

See also
SWAZILAND SOLIDARITY CONFERENCE

SWAZI SOLIDARITY CONFERENCE

Now, in the ongoing series of news that you never get to hear in Swaziland, here is the opening address at the Zimbabwe and Swaziland Solidarity Conference in Johannesburg, South Africa, on yesterday (10 August 2008).

It was delivered by Zwelinzima Vavi, General Secretary of the Congress of South African Trade Unions (COSATU) and it dealt with the existing non-democratic nature of Swaziland, in particular highlighting the role monarchy has played in oppressing the rights of ordinary people.

Our message is clear – Zimbabwe and Swaziland cannot continue to be islands of dictatorship surrounded by a sea of democracy in our region. We demand freedom and democracy for citizens of both countries. We want democracy for the citizens of our neighbouring countries today and not tomorrow.

The need for this conference is underlined by deepening crises in both countries. The human rights abuses in Zimbabwe have scaled new heights. The beatings of ordinary people, the burning down of their property, the killings and torture continue as though the current negotiations means nothing to the illegal Mugabe regime.

Why [has] Swaziland escaped the international human rights radar for so long?

Swaziland got its independence from Britain in 1968 under King Sobhuza.

However, this was merely a transfer of power from the British colonial masters to a neo-colonial monarchy, through which the British sought to re-establish its domination and exploitation.

The nature of this monarchy was defined the King's 1973 proclamation to the nation:

"Now, therefore I, Sobhuza 11, king of Swaziland, hereby declare that, in collaboration with my cabinet ministers and supported by the whole nation, I have assumed supreme power in the kingdom of Swaziland and that all legislative, executive and judicial powers is now vested in myself and shall, for the meantime be exercised in collaboration with my cabinet ministers.

"I further declare that to ensure the continued maintenance of peace, order and good government, my armed forces have been posted to all strategic places and have taken charge of all government places and all public services. All political parties and similar bodies that cultivate and bring about disturbances and ill-feelings within the nation are hereby dissolved and prohibited."

This decree laid the basis for the current political architecture, where politics are the exclusive preserve of the ruling royal elite. In 1978 they introduced a system of called tinkhundla, which sought to entrench the hegemony of royal supremacy and deepen the semi-feudal and neo-colonial character of Swazi society. It fragmented Swazis into competing localities called tinkhundla in the name of "unique and home-grown democracy", which is directly in conflict with the universal principles of democracy.

The world has conveniently remained silent about Swaziland and allowed the ruling royal regime to get away with murder. The world remains silent, after a regime has been allowed to enforce a state of emergency for more than 34 years, despite Amnesty International raising, on several occasions, the issue of extreme police brutality in Swaziland, in its fact-finding mission's damning report on the Swazi security forces.

Why does the Commonwealth and Britain apply double standards when it comes to Swaziland, in contrast to their hysterical attacks on Mugabe? Why does it not apply smart sanctions against the stubborn regime for refusing to unban political parties and political activities in general?

Why does the Commonwealth support and heap praises on a constitution that entrenches the power of the ruling aristocracy and affirm the state of emergency, yet unequivocally demand clear guidelines for democracy elsewhere?

Poor people are on the receiving end of the regime's viciousness, with more and more Swazis being forced to cross the borders into South Africa in search of jobs, yet the country is well endowed with abundant natural resources that have become a preserve of a tiny ruling minority.

Finally, the following conditions obtain as regards the royal 'elections':

Political parties remain banned, with the exception of the royal broederbond, which is the only legal political force that has monopoly over the entire political life of our country as an organised force.

The new constitution of the monarchy, itself a direct off-shoot of the king's decree of 1973, bans political parties and criminalises all forms of political activity and the basic rights to associate and organise, not to mention demonstrations and marches.

Parliament is nothing but a rubber stamp and stooge of royal power. It has no power to determine anything that is not in the interests of the royal family and the monarchy, aside the fact that it is largely comprised of royalists and their apologists.

The media and judiciary are extensions and auxiliaries of the royal establishment, independence is a luxury they cannot afford.

Political activists are regularly detained for their peaceful political activities, which are in anyway, illegal even according to the new constitution proclaimed by the king recently

In this conference we shall consider the same programme we developed in the preparatory meeting for discussion. King Mswati is not welcome in South Africa [at the head of states’ summit]. He is not a head of state. There has never been any democratic election in Swaziland where he was elected. Political parties remain banned. Free political activity is not allowed. Basic freedoms such as a freedom of speech and association are brutally denied. We are angry that the Southern African development Community (SADC) and all others continue to embrace this fraud.

SWAZIS CAN’T ESCAPE THE TRUTH

I was watching the coverage of the opening ceremony of the Olympic Games on BBC [British Broadcasting Corporation] television today (Friday 8 August 2008) when the small contingent of athletes from Swaziland came into the arena.

Here come the team from Swaziland, the BBC commentator said, ‘one of the last remaining absolute monarchies in the world’.

And that was all he said before he turned his attention to the nation following the Swazis.

So there you have it. The only thing the international community knows about Swaziland is that it isn’t a democracy and it is ruled by an absolute monarchy.

You can make all the excuses you like about Swaziland’s forthcoming elections, but some people know the truth.

Or to put it in the spirit of the Olympic Games – ‘you can run but you cannot hide’.

BOYCOTT THE SWAZILAND ELECTION

News that Swaziland’s Prime Minister Themba Dlamini isn’t standing for parliament in the forthcoming election in the kingdom confirms that the poll is undemocratic.

Dlamini isn’t standing for parliament, but that doesn’t mean he is giving up politics, Government Spokesperson Percy Simelane was quoted by the Times of Swaziland on Monday (4 August 2008)

In a democracy the announcement that the sitting prime minister was not running for office would be major front page news. It might even get into the international media. But Dlamini’s decision was hardly mentioned inside Swaziland and as far as I can tell has been completely ignored outside the kingdom.

The reason for this is simple. Dlamini didn’t stand for election to parliament last time. Dlamini was appointed as prime minister by King Mswati III. That means, quite simply, that Dlamini was never elected by anyone.

And, he was chosen by a king who was himself not elected by anyone either.

The king didn’t even decide to choose someone from among the elected members of parliament to lead the government. He chose a complete outsider.

If you need proof of how meaningless the Swazi parliament is, there you have it.

Newspapers in Swaziland have been calling the election that takes place later this month (August 2008) a ‘mockery’. They are right, but they are right for the wrong reasons. They are citing examples of mismanagement and confusion. The nominations that took place this past weekend were called at short notice and there was confusion about who could and who could not be nominated.

There is also a long running argument about whether the members of the Elections and Boundaries Commission (EBC) who are tasked with running the election are qualified (in terms of the new Swazi Constitution) for the job.

And, even under the constitution, political parties are banned in Swaziland.

All these things make the election a ‘mockery’, but the biggest ‘mockery’ is the nature of ‘democracy’ in Swaziland.

I tend to follow what I like to call the Commonwealth Expert Team (CET) position on this. Regular readers of this blog will remember that after the last election in 2003, the CET, which had been ‘observing’ the elections in Swaziland, reported, ‘we do not regard the credibility of these National elections as an issue: no elections can be credible when they are for a Parliament which does not have power and when political parties are banned’.

In June (2008) the European Union (EU) Ambassador to Swaziland Peter Beck Christiansen said the EU would not be ‘observing’ the forthcoming election. He was reported by the Times of Swaziland saying there are ‘shortcomings in the kingdom’s democracy’.

The Times reported Christiansen saying, ‘It is noted that the Prime Minister is not elected by Parliament.’

He added, ‘The same applies to Cabinet Ministers.’

He also said, ‘It’s clear that the [Swazi] constitution has some shortcomings.’

There has been a heated debate among ‘progressives’ in Swaziland about whether they should take part in the election or boycott it. Those in favour of participation believe that it is possible to reform the system from within (although I have yet to see a coherent explanation of how in practical terms this change will take place).

People on the other side of the argument believe the election is bogus (as the CET does) and that taking part in the election encourages people inside Swaziland and in the international community generally to believe that Swaziland is presently a democratic country and its only fault is that the democracy needs a bit of fine tuning to make it work better.

(If you want to follow some of the debate among the progressives click here to go to the Swaziland Solidarity Network forum.)

It is right to boycott the election. It has no validity and it confuses people. The truth is that Swaziland is not a democracy and is run by an autonomous monarch who is allowed to organise the kingdom in any way he wants. If you doubt this just think again about the way the prime minister is appointed.

But democrats should not ignore the election. We should take every opportunity to point out to Swazis and to the international community exactly why this election is ‘a mockery’. We should argue that for there to be a genuine democracy in Swaziland, the powers of the monarch have to be curtailed and political parties ‘unbanned’.

We should have a free media that allow debate on the real issues in Swaziland to take place and give space for discussion of policies that could divert the kingdom from the road to destruction it is presently following.

Only once these things have happened can we begin to talk about who should be elected to parliament.

See also
SWAZILAND ELECTIONS 2008
EU SNUBS SWAZILAND ELECTION
IS SWAZILAND’S ELECTION CREDIBLE?
SWAZI ELECTION ‘A MOCKERY’

NEW ‘TIMES OF SWAZILAND’ WEBSITE

The Times of Swaziland and its companion newspapers has a new look (and vastly improved) website.

The only daily newspaper group in Swaziland that is independent from the government revamped its website on 20 July 2008 and it seems to have been quite a hit with readers.

Each day 20 or more news, business, and sports reports from the printed edition of the paper are put on the Internet. And unlike the previous Times’ website where items only stayed on the site for one day, the new site has a permanent archive so visitors can look back at reports published in the past.

At least I think the intention is to make the archive permanent. I have noticed for the past two Sundays that some items that were posted on the Times Sunday site disappeared by the following day.

The site is becoming popular with visitors and some reports have been viewed by upward of 500 people. In Swaziland, where hardly anyone has access to the Internet, this is a remarkable achievement. I wonder who the readers are.

I suspect many of them are people living outside of Swaziland who aren’t able to buy the newspapers themselves.

The biggest innovation on the new Times website is the opportunity for readers to comment on articles. You can click on a story and tell the Times and all the other readers of the website what you think about the report.

This is potentially dangerous territory for the Times. As I have reported many times before there is a great deal of censorship and self-censorship among the media in Swaziland and there are some topics (most notably the monarchy) that media are reluctant to discuss.

By allowing readers to leave their own comments, the Times might find itself publishing material that would never be allowed in the printed edition.

Here are some examples, I found.

‘Whether or not the constitution allows for political parties is irrelevant. This is still an absolute monarchy and until the people wrestle power from the current rulers, it will remain just an empty document. The argument is valid, true, but it doesn’t change anything. Swazis, wake up and smell the coffee. We’ve been in this sad state for too long now.’

‘VIVA PUDEMO VIVA!’ [PUDEMO is a political party banned in Swaziland]

‘How long does it take for people to see that we don’t have a government of the people by the people?’

‘This just shows the extent to which government controls everything and everyone in the country whereby individual's rights to exercise choice are crushed.’

Even Walter Bennett, who is a bit of a darling of the Swazi media, doesn’t escape criticism from a reader who accused him of talking ‘a load of bolox’. This is not exactly scholarly discourse, but I’ll leave it to you to decide on the statement’s accuracy.

Looking at some of the comments that have been left I notice that readers are also critical of the standard of journalism in the Times itself. One person commented on a headline to a story that was not supported by the content of the report that it accompanied. Another criticised the reporter for being too quick to believe what they were told. Another criticised the Times for using anonymous sources.

It is impossible to tell as a reader whether any of the comments to the website are being deleted or altered by the newspaper's management. If anyone has any experience of placing comments on the Times’ website, I’d be interested to hear.

The only other daily newspaper in Swaziland, the Swazi Observer also has a website which has a more extensive archive than the Times but doesn’t offer readers the chance to leave comments. To access the Observer site click here.

See also
Times of Swaziland

Swazi Observer

CENSORSHIP AND THE SWAZI MEDIA

FOUR IN TEN SWAZIS FACE STARVATION

It is a great pity that in Swaziland many journalists do not understand what they are writing about.

This leads them to simply copy down word for word from press releases they have been given by organisations seeking publicity, without revealing to their readers, listeners, or viewers, what lies behind the words.

This does a disservice to the people the journalists are supposed to be serving and keeps vital information from them.

I was reminded of this yesterday (5 August 2008) by two reports in the Swazi Observer.

Both reports were based on a United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) Human Development report on Swaziland.

This is how one of the Observer reports started, ‘SWAZILAND’S high Human Poverty Index (HPI), which indicates that the country has one of the most deprived populations in the world, is inconsistent with its lower middle income status.

‘A recent United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) Human Development report states that the HPI shows fundamental problems in the distribution of past gains, as the high growth of earlier years failed to trickle down to the majority of the people.’

‘“Even in money metric terms, poverty in Swaziland is very high,” states the report.’

The other report was about the health of Swaziland’s economy and stated, ‘“The emerging international trade architecture under the auspices of the World Trade Organisation, which is pushing for reduced tariffs, will further erode Swaziland’s receipts from the Southern African Customs Union (SACU),” the report states.

‘“Mention must also be made of the Southern African Development Community (SADC) trade protocol that is consistent with the global thrust for lower tariff walls. Fiscal policy, therefore, faces a big challenge to protect expenditures that are important for human development, even as overall expenditure is being cut. It calls for the overhauling of expenditure patterns.”

Do you know what any of that means? If I were a betting man I’d wager the reporter hadn’t a clue.

The UNDP is full of technical language otherwise known as ‘jargon’. Economists might well understand what it means, but ordinary readers would not. That is why it is the job of journalists to explain it to them.

In Swaziland where journalists are often hired ‘off the street’ with little experience and no relevant qualifications for the job (but media houses find them cheap to employ) the level of professional competence is very low. I don’t think even journalists themselves would argue with that statement. Readers are short changed by this lack of expertise and it is difficult to see things changing unless the media houses are prepared to invest more in salaries for journalists and reward them well if they develop their careers.

Now back to the UNDP.

What the UNDP report actually said (and the readers will not know) is that Swaziland is not a poor country. It is neither one of the poorest nor the richest countries in the world. It is (unsurprisingly) therefore known and a middle income country. The problem in Swaziland is that the wealth that is created in Swaziland goes to a very small number of people. Therefore, some people are very rich (I’ll leave it to you to supply the names) while 70 per cent of the population of about one million people live below the official poverty line with an income of less than on US dollar (E7) per day.

One line in the UNDP report (as copied out by the Observer) said, ‘“In addition, 37% [of the population] were deemed to be living in extreme poverty, which is indigence or destitution, lacking the ability to satisfy even minimal food intake necessary for an active life.”

Or to translate in plain English: ‘Nearly four people in ten people are so poor they are starving to death.’

The UNDP report also warned (yet again) that the Swazi Government had to cut back on expenditure and could not expect the high levels of income from the Southern African Customs Union (SACU) that it has had in the past (that’s what all the stuff about ‘emerging international trade architecture’ in the extract I quoted earlier is about).

So to summarise: ‘four in ten people in Swaziland face starvation and the already fragile Swaziland economy is about to be destroyed.’

I hope you would agree with me that the Swazi Observer seems to have missed a pretty good story.

SWAZI ELECTION ‘A MOCKERY’

Swaziland newspapers have attacked the kingdom’s forthcoming elections as ‘a mockery’.

In separate comment articles the editors of the Swazi News and the Times Sunday both used the term ‘mockery’ to describe the way in which the elections have been run. This past weekend saw nominations for candidates open and close, but people were only given three days notice to prepare for them.

Meanwhile, the Swazi High Court was asked to rule whether the Elections and Boundaries Commission (EBC), the organisation tasked with overseeing the election, was legal under the Swazi constitution. The High Court dismissed the application and reserved judgment.

The editor of the Times Sunday Mbongeni Mbingo, writing in his own newspaper (3 August 2008), said, ‘The elections have always been presented as a mockery, since the day Chief Gija [chair of the EBC] and his commissioners were handed to us.’

He went on, ‘Right now, I am convinced they cannot do the job and they are an embarrassment. I hope they know this, because we cannot disguise it anymore.’

Mbingo went on to say, ‘My frustration today has a lot to do with why the elections are made to be such a mess. I am wondering if people are deliberately doing things to embarrass our king and country and to make sure that the elections flop. I wonder what is there for them when they achieve their goal, but it is perfectly clear right now that there are dark forces pulling this country back.

‘I can’t fathom how we could get things this wrong—so embarrassingly wrong! This week, our EBC decided—or should we say they realised—that there needed to be the nominations, the first step toward the elections. The people were not given enough time to prepare, and shockingly, the EBC, its polling officers and everyone else expected to help, were not ready.

‘It was like we were all caught off guard. This shocked me. Who decided that this weekend should be the beginning of the elections, and when was this decision taken? Why was it not communicated to the public in time?

‘I am assuming this latest comedy of errors goes to show that people were right to question Chief Gija’s leadership qualities.’

Mbingo went on, ‘This is frustrating because it gives the world the idea that we are not capable of putting our house in order, or in fact of getting people who could run things properly and efficiently. The world always has to look at us as the laughing stock, people who couldn’t be serious, and a country lacking in leadership.’

Thulani Thwala, editor of the Swazi News, writing in his own newspaper (2 August 2008), said, ‘The elections have become a mockery before they begin.’

He went on, ‘... no one is certain on whether these elections are legal or illegal. My immediate thinking is that they are illegal. We go to nominations today without the voter’s roll. We begin the nomination with a certain section of people still firmly occupying public office and they might be nominated. Some law-abiding citizens have already taken leave of absence from their respective work places to contest the elections but we still have a group of men and women who still call themselves Cabinet ministers. Why are they still in office? Should they be in office really?’

In a direct plea to Swaziland’s King Mswati III, Thwala wrote, ‘We go to the nominations today Your Majesty a confused lot. As you read this letter we are not sure whether we are going or coming or both. We do not know whether what we are doing is right or wrong. Your country needs direction now and it can only be you to lead us. The people you entrusted with such a task have failed.’

In a news report headed Confusion, chaos, controversy, the Times Sunday reported (3 August 2008) on the first day of nominations, ‘Some of the problems that elections officers had to surmount were rowdy voters who learnt on the day that they were “not eligible” to vote.

'They were later allowed after the EBC allegedly admitted it made a blunder. In other areas, such as Kwaluseni, land or chieftaincy disputes delayed the nomination process, while in some cases, elections officers were forced to postpone. In Northern Hhohho, a number of nominating venues had to cancel due to problems that came to the fore just before starting time, while some delayed but proceeded later. 

‘The EBC offices at Nkhanini were inundated with calls from elections officers and returning officers who came across different kinds of problems, some of which forced them to postpone.’

The report went on, ‘While some of the people were rejected as nominees because they were currently employed in public office some who are in similar positions were nominated without a fuss. Although some had to show proof that they had resigned from employment, one teacher from Nhlangano lied to election officers, claiming that he is employed in a shop in Nhlangano. His name was not immediately revealed, however, he is currently being probed for fraud.’

The Times of Swaziland yesterday (4 August 2008) in a report headed Shock, surprise, chaos at nominations said, ‘Though preliminary reports from the EBC show that it has so far been smooth, various reports from across the country show otherwise.’

It went on, ‘While many ended the weekend on a good note, toasting to a possible seat in the august house, television star Themba Xaba saw his dream up in smoke after he was disqualified, while numerous other civil servants with no leave forms were also turned back.’

The report added, ‘At Butfongweni area, residents were, however, stunned when a chief’s daughter allegedly tried to use her connections to get nominated.’

A separate report in the Times (4 August 2008) gave details of the incident, ‘According to the polling station’s presiding officer, identified as Mrs Mthupha, people had to be dragged from their homesteads in order for them to “second” the princess’ supposed nomination.

‘“She came here with instructions, which she said were from the Elections and Boundaries Commission. The instruction was to the effect that we should include her name in the list of nominated candidates,” she alleged.

‘The presiding officer said the incident caused a temporary halt to the election process as the polling officers would hear none of what the chief’s daughter was saying.

‘Mthupha disclosed that the “Princess” first arrived at the polling station on Saturday but was turned back by the polling officers because she had no proof of registration with her.

‘“On Saturday her name was raised but it was later discovered that she was not eligible to participate here since she was registered under Mbekelweni,” she explained.

‘The action by the polling officers did not go down well with the royal family member who then took up the matter with the EBC, which later sent word that she must be allowed to participate in the election. The message was communicated through Returning Officer Driven Nkhambule.’

See also

SWAZILAND ELECTIONS 2008

JOURNO LECTURER IS MUGABE MAN

As the University of Swaziland (UNISWA) searches for a new journalism professor, let’s hope it doesn’t follow a lead of its counterpart in Botswana and employ one of Robert Mugabe’s chief apologists.

It has just been revealed that the University of Botswana (UB) has hired Caesar Zvayi as a journalism lecturer.

Zvayi is the former political editor of Zimbabwe’s state-owned Herald newspaper. He is on the list of members of Zimbabwe’s ruling ZANU-PF party who have been slapped with European Union (EU) sanctions. He is banned from travel and has had his assets frozen.

By making the ban the EU accuses him of propagating hate speech and war in his news reports.

The Botswana Gazette reports that ‘A number of Zimbabweans, whom Zvayi dismisses as MDC supporters [the main opposition party in Zimbabwe], have questioned his credentials to teach a discipline whose principles they say he does not respect.

‘They accuse him of being linked to a spate of attacks on the Opposition MDC supporters, which led to their displacement from Zimbabwe and their flight to neighbouring countries and abroad.’

The South African University of Witwatersrand journalism website journalism.co.ac reports, ‘The Head of Media Studies Department at the University, Professor David Kerr said although Zvayi’s ideology and his support of Mugabe is an issue of concern, the University employs staff on academic merit, experience and a candidate’s political views are not considered.’

Kerr told the Botswana Gazette that the university was happy with Zvayi’s academic background and he was the only candidate that satisfied their criteria during recruitment.

Zvayi is quoted by the Botswana Gazette saying, ‘I make no apologies for supporting Zanu-PF because I subscribe to its Pan African values. I will never support the MDC as currently constituted because to me it is a counter-revolutionary Trojan horse that is working with outsiders to subvert the logical conclusion of the Zimbabwean revolution.’

The Botswana Gazette reports that Zvayi is one of 137 people just added to the EU sanctions list. I hope UNISWA has a copy.

To access the full Botswana Gazette report click here

SWAZI PRESS AND ‘WARLIKE’ MUSLIMS

The Swazi newspapers report Muslims as warlike people who are plotting against Swaziland and who have no respect for Swazi customs.

This is one of the conclusions from an academic research paper I have written that has just been published.

In June 2007 inhabitants of the Swaziland capital Mbabane panicked when it was rumoured that a group of cannibals was at large in the city.

To report this, the Swazi News newspaper dominated its front page with the headline EMAZIMU! [the siSwati word for cannibals) and a photograph taken from the Internet that purported to be of cannibals in the Amazon jungle. On page two the newspaper reported that Mbabane was ‘ripped by a tense sense of fear’.

The report continued, ‘The city has been engulfed by fear that strange beings, or man-eating beings, have descended on the city’ (Swazi News June 16, 2007).

‘Cannibals are feared to be in Mbabane, and the nation has pressed the panic button in fear that their safety cannot be guaranteed anymore.

‘Panicking members of the public have flooded with calls the Royal Swaziland Police Service and His Majesty’s Correctional Services.”

The report went on in similar terms until the newspaper saw fit to inform its readers that the ‘invasion’ of Mbabane and other areas of Swaziland was not an invasion of cannibals but a visit to the city by a group of Muslims.

The following week the newspaper returned to the story and revealed that the cannibals were in fact a visiting group of Muslims from Pakistan and there was no need to panic. However, the report included this sentence, ‘Obviously, confused by a group of at least 15 men with beards and of foreign origin it was easy for everyone to refer to the group of cannibals.’ (Swazi News June 23 2007).

The newspaper did not explain how a group who were visiting Swaziland to engage in prayer could be confused with flesh eating cannibals.

This news report indicates the extent of prejudice towards Muslims that exists in the Swazi media. The reports of panic in the streets of Mbabane and the glib assertion by the Swazi News that it was ‘obvious’ why Swazi people could mistake Muslims for cannibals highlights the question of how newspapers in Swaziland frame what I am calling in this article the ‘Muslim threat’. My article explores more fully the role of the press in this framing.

To examine coverage of Muslims fully my paper concentrates on three themes about Muslims that are present in the Swazi Press. These themes are (i) the perception that Muslims were to blame for the changing of the Swaziland constitution itself; (ii) a report that Muslims were enticing university students to convert to Islam in return for scholarships; and (iii) a public symposium run on the subject of Islam.

This newspaper coverage affords an opportunity to discuss how the framing of the Muslim in Swaziland has been organised with particular reference to professional and operational determinants and the creation of stereotypes.

The article concludes that the Swazi Press frames Muslims as warlike people who are plotting against Swaziland and who have no respect for Swazi customs. The religion of Islam is inferior to Christianity ‘the only true religion’ and Muslims are conniving to force decent Christians in Swaziland to convert to Islam in return for money.

The research is published in Lwati, A Journal of Contemporary Research, Vol 5. For subscription details contact the editor Dr F Mogu on lwatijo@yahoo.com

See also
MORE RACISM IN THE SWAZI PRESS

TAIWAN AND SWAZI BIRTHDAY BASH

As the 40/40 celebrations to mark both the 40^th birthday of Swaziland’s King Mswati III and the kingdom’s independence from Great Britain get ever closer invitations are being sent out to heads of state across the world.

An invitation to the Zimbabwean despot Robert Mugabe has already caused anger in the Swazi media and elsewhere.

Now news emerges that the president of Taiwan Ma Ying-jeou is also on the invitation list.

As we know Taiwan and Swaziland are close ‘friends’, even though it is a friendship based on expediency. Taiwan wants to get into the United Nations and is giving development ‘aid’ to countries that will help it to achieve its goal. There is one condition however – if you want cash from Taiwan you mustn’t support Taiwan’s arch enemy ‘mainland’ China.

The invitation to Ma hasn’t gone down well in all sections of Taiwan.

One newspaper columnist Johnny Neihu, writing in the Taipei Times yesterday (2 August 2008) suspects that King Mswati III has only sent out the invitation to Ma so the king can tap Taiwan for more money.

He writes, ‘Should Ma attend, the king will probably turn round as everyone is leaving and ask Ma to help pick up the bar tab, or hit him with a request to help pay for some new gold brocade cushion covers in the presidential palace, or even worse, buy new shoes for all of his children and grandchildren.’

Neihu goes on to warn the Taiwanese president to lock up his daughters if he takes up the invitation to visit Swaziland. Or better still, leave them at home.

It seems King Mswati’s reputation for the ladies has preceded him.

Neihu writes, ‘according to entirely reliable Internet sources, Mswati has 14 wives and 23 children — impressive stats for someone so young.

‘But even those numbers pale in comparison to his old man King Sobhuza II, who apparently had 70 wives at the time of his death in 1982 and left more than 1,000 grandchildren.

‘“I find very little time with my family most of the time. I normally work until 11pm ... and this makes me feel stressed because I’m being over-worked, but I have to do everything possible to satisfy my people,” Mswati told the British Broadcasting Corporation in a 2001 interview.

‘No prizes for guessing what he does to relieve the stress.’

Neihu goes on to discuss the way King Mswati chooses his wives and the king’s attitudes to HIV and AIDS. To read the full column click here.

See also
TAIWAN ‘BRIBES’ SWAZILAND
THE TRUTH TOLD FROM TAIWAN

SWAZI MEN STILL TAKING HIV RISKS

I wrote in May 2008 that the Swazi media were misleading people into believing that male circumcision could help in the fight against HIV AIDS.

I said that there was a wealth of evidence in the global medical community that circumcision made little or no difference to the way HIV was transmitted. My blog prompted a lot of response from readers, all of whom agreed with my general thesis.

As further evidence of how misinformation is spreading in Swaziland, this week the international news agency IRIN reported, ‘There is a growing belief among men in Swaziland that circumcision provides complete protection against HIV.’

The report, which has been published across the world goes on, ‘In recent years circumcision has been lauded by Swazi public health officials as a procedure that reduces the rate of HIV transmission by about 50 percent, but it is far from the silver bullet solution some men see it as.’

IRIN cites the case of Joy Magongo, a mother of two whose husband moved out to live with his second wife after the couple discovered they were both HIV-positive. ‘Men say, “I’ve been circumcised. I don’t have to wear a condom.” They get infected, and they give us HIV.

‘“He [my husband] was circumcised and felt he didn't have to wear a condom. When we found we had HIV after testing, he blamed me. He said, “You brought HIV into this house.” It was because I tested first, when I was pregnant with my second child,” she said.

‘“My husband did not believe he could be HIV-positive because he was circumcised. I did all I could to convince him to test, and he finally did. That was the end. He took another wife and left us,” Magongo said. Polygamy is legally recognised in Swaziland.’

IRIN quotes a Zambian doctor who treats HIV/AIDS patients at government hospitals, and who declined to be named. ‘“It’s the law of unintended consequences. Introducing the procedure, there was insufficient attention given to cultural factors, attitudes and human psychology.

‘“Many of the men I speak with think circumcision is like an AIDS vaccine. It’s not. It’s a useful tool to reduce chances of infection at a time and place where few other tools are available, but you can still contract HIV and pass it onto a partner,” he said.’

Even though there is much evidence that circumcision is ineffective in the fight against HIV AIDS, IRIN reports that in Swaziland people still believe it is of some use. So clearly, there is still a long way to go in educating people in the kingdom.

To read the full article click here.

See also
CIRCUMCISION

SWAZI MEDIA AND CIRCUMCISION MYTH

SWAZI PRINCESS TALKS ABOUT HER DAD

Swazi Media Commentary has been giving Swaziland’s King Mswati III a hard time lately, what with all these posts about how the Swazi media are scared of him and won’t report things that offend him and then there’s the public relations disaster over the 40/40 celebrations. On top of this there was the talk about how Mswati actually came to be king. And let’s draw a veil over the worry that women in Uganda were said to have about the king.

You see the truth is that the king is a misunderstood man. He isn’t a dictator and the money he spends on his lavish lifestyle is his own money and he can do with it what he likes. And people in Swaziland are not oppressed.

So there.

No, of course these are not my words. They are the words of Princess Sikhanyiso, the king’s eldest daughter.

In my report on censorship in Swazi newsrooms I make reference to the king being angry that the media once interviewed Sikhanyiso. He told them never to do it again.

I don’t know why he got so upset; she sticks up for Swaziland’s ‘absolute monarchy’ like a trooper.

Here’s Sikhanyiso from an interview published in the Daily Express, United Kingdom, and reproduced in the Nation magazine in Swaziland in January 2007.

On the king taking many wives

‘No one is forced to be his wife. Everybody has a choice to say ‘no’ if they don’t want to.’

On the king’s lifestyle

‘People at school would say we were taking all the money and wasting [it]. Quite frankly, I don’t see where I come in, and even where my father is concerned, half the money he gets comes from his own businesses. It is his money, so he does have the right to spend it.

‘His cars are meant to be bought by the government, but he’s started buying them himself because people have been complaining.

‘If people knew what kind of a person the king is, they’d want it to continue as an absolute monarchy, because he’s a kind and generous man. There is a plethora of charity groups he has started.

‘He has so much to deal with: he has 500 (five hundred) siblings to look after and then he has the political arena as well. They like to give out the idea the Swazi people are oppressed but they’re not.’

It seems to me that Sikhanyiso is a Godsend to the monarchy. The foreign media love her and she gives out the ‘official’ message that Swaziland is a heavenly place rather well.

Oh, and if the pictures that went along with the article are anything to go by she has good legs and big breasts, which she doesn’t mind showing.

See also
KING MSWATI III
CENSORSHIP AND THE SWAZI MEDIA
WITHOUT THE SWAZI KING ON TOUR