Swazi Media Commentary

Wednesday, 2 May 2018

SWAZI KING AND QUEENS OF BLING

It is not only King Mswati III, Swaziland’s absolute monarch, who displays his vast wealth about his person. His family are the same.

He wore a watch worth US$1.6 million and a suit beaded with diamonds at his 50^th birthday party. He did this while children in his kingdom are on the verge of starvation and are only kept alive by food donated from abroad.

Days before his birthday King Mswati took delivery of his second private jet plane. This one, an A340-300 Airbus had a purchase price of US$13.2 million, but with VIP upgrades it reportedly cost about US$30 million.

The King has 13 palaces and fleets of top-of-the-range Mercedes and BMW cars. Meanwhile seven in ten of his subjects estimated to number 1.1 million live in abject poverty with incomes less than the equivalent of US$2 per day.

The King is not alone in brazenly showing off his wealth. His family are not shy either. King Mswati has married 15 wives, but with death and defections it is believed the number remaining might now be 13.

A Facebook page called Swazi Royal Family Leeches has been monitoring the bling count. Here are some of its findings.

King Mswati's daughters, Siba, Tiyandza and Sikhanyiso are pictured with a friend on vacation in Cancun, Mexico. Tiyandza, daughter to King Mswati and Queen LaNgangaza, is wearing a 47 mm 18K Pink Gold Ballon Bleu De Cartier watch worth US$58,500 (E760,500).

In the next picture Queen LaFogiyane is wearing a Jacob & Co Fully Iced Diamond watch that retails at US$120,000 (E1.56 million).

Queen LaMahlangu has a Jacob & Co Brilliant Skeleton White Gold watch worth US$46,996 (E610,948).

The King’s first-born child Princess Sikhanyiso wears a Jacob and Co World Is Yours Five Time Zones 47 mm Diamond watch with a price tag of US$9,999 (E130,000).

Many of the watches worn by the Swazi Royal Family come from Jacob & Co. In December 2015 the Mail & Guardian newspaper in South Africa reported there was ‘strong evidence’ King Mswati was ‘in business’ with the company’s owner Jacob Arabo, whom it described as ‘a wealthy Uzbekh-American jeweller who has done jail time for lying to federal investigators about his alleged links to a multimillion-dollar drug ring’.

The business centred on a gold mining venture in northern Swaziland called Lufafa Mine Pty Ltd.

The Mail & Guardian reported, ‘Arabo, known as “Jacob the Jeweller” and the “King of Bling”, is a purveyor of flamboyant jewellery to clients ranging from the hip-hop industry to Hollywood and the sporting world through his firm Jacob & Co. He was arrested in 2006 at his flagship New York jewellery outlet on suspicion of tax evasion and laundering more than US$270-million in narcotics proceeds for a Detroit-based drug ring called the Black Mafia Family.

‘Arabo was sentenced by a Detroit court to 30 months in prison for lying to investigators, fined US$50 000 and ordered to forfeit $2-million to the United States government. He was released from jail in April 2010.’

The newspaper reported at a ‘consultative conference’ at the Pigg’s Peak Hotel in August 2015, Swazi Minerals Board chairperson Winston Lomahoza told the local media that the King owned 25 percent of the shares in the Lufafa mine, the government owned 25 percent and Jacob & Co the remaining 50 percent.

The newspaper reported, ‘This conforms precisely with the requirements of the Mines and Minerals Act. Lomahoza added that he was “grateful that his majesty had allowed mining to take place yet again”.’

The King holds 25 percent of all mining shares in Swaziland ‘in trust for the Swazi nation’ but it is widely believed he uses the money from the mining royalties to fund his own lavish lifestyle. The King does not pay tax.

The Observer on Saturday, a newspaper in effect owned by the King, reported in January 2016 that the gold mine on Lufafa Mountains, near Pigg’s Peak in the Hhohho region, was estimated to contain 251,000 ounces of gold, said to be worth more than E4 billion (US$263 million). If that was the case and the mine was worked successfully the King’s share would be US$65 million.

In October 2017 it was reported the mine had closed after allegations of poor management.

Tuesday, 1 May 2018

SHUN THE BOGUS SWAZILAND ELECTION

Commentary

Swaziland has asked other countries to send it money to help pay for upcoming national elections. It is a request that must be refused. The elections are widely recognised to be bogus.

The kingdom is ruled by King Mswati III as the last absolute monarch in sub-Saharan Africa.

Political parties are banned from taking part in elections and the King chooses the Prime Minister and the Cabinet. The PM is always a Dlamini; the King’s clan.

Elections are held every five years in Swaziland. People only get to select 55 of 65 members of the House of Assembly. The King chooses the other 10. No members of the Swazi Senate are elected by the people; the King chooses 20 and the other 10 are elected by members of the House of Assembly.

After the last election in 2013, King Mswati appointed nine princes and princesses to the House of Assembly and the Senate.

King Mswati also appointed four chiefs and one acting chief. In Swaziland chiefs are the personal representatives of the King in their local areas. They are seen as the eyes and ears of the king and often delegate his powers to themselves.

He also appointed another 16 members of his Royal Family to top political jobs; effectively carving up public life in the kingdom in his favour.

The next election is due later in 2018 at a date yet to be set by the King; the present parliament ends in October.

Swaziland’s Elections and Boundaries Commission Chair Chief Gija Dlamini (a half-brother of the King) said he welcomed financial assistance from abroad. The Swazi Observer, a newspaper in effect owned by the King, on Thursday (26 April 2018) reported him saying, ‘Even prominent countries like the United States of America seek financial assistance from other countries at times so we wouldn’t close the door on donor aid towards the elections, but would gladly appreciate assistance,’ he said.

Democracies would serve the people of Swaziland better by rebuffing calls for assistance. They should also decline invitations to monitor the election for fairness. Instead, they should clearly state that the election cannot be considered free and fair under the present political set-up.

There are precedents for this. In 2008 the European Union (EU) Ambassador to Swaziland Peter Beck Christiansen said the EU would not be ‘observing’ the election. He was reported by the Times of Swaziland saying there were ‘shortcomings in the kingdom’s democracy’. He highlighted that the Prime Minister and Cabinet were not elected by Parliament.

In 2003, the Commonwealth Expert Group declined an invitation to observe the election. In a letter it stated, ‘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.’

Indeed, the parliament has no power. The Prime Minister is merely a placeman for the King. This is no secret. The present Prime Minister Barnabas Dlamini is on record saying the government belonged to the King. The Times Sunday also reported him saying, ‘Government listens when His Majesty speaks and we will always implement the wishes of the King and the Queen Mother.’

Many organisations have called for Swaziland’s constitution to be rewritten to make the kingdom more democratic.

In November 2008 the Commonwealth Expert Team, which had monitored the election that year called for a review of the constitution because the elections were not credible since political parties were banned in Swaziland.

After the most recent national election in 2013, the African Union (AU) mission called for fundamental changes in the kingdom to ensure people had freedom of speech and of assembly. The AU said the Swaziland Constitution guaranteed ‘fundamental rights and freedoms including the rights to freedom of association’, but in practice ‘rights with regard to political assembly and association are not fully enjoyed’. The AU said this was because political parties were not allowed to contest elections.

The AU urged Swaziland to review the constitution, especially in the areas of ‘freedoms of conscience, expression, peaceful assembly, association and movement as well as international principles for free and fair elections and participation in electoral process’.

In its report on the 2013 elections, the Commonwealth observers recommended that measures be put in place to ensure separation of powers between the government, parliament and the courts so that Swaziland was in line with its international commitments.

They also called on the Swaziland Constitution to be ‘revisited’.

The report stated, ‘This should ideally be carried out through a fully inclusive, consultative process with all Swazi political organisations and civil society (needed, with the help of constitutional experts), to harmonise those provisions which are in conflict. The aim is to ensure that Swaziland’s commitment to political pluralism is unequivocal.’

It also recommended that a law be passed to allow for political parties to take part in elections, ‘so as to give full effect to the letter and spirit of Section 25 of the Constitution, and in accordance with Swaziland’s commitment to its regional and international commitments’.

In 2015, following a visit to Swaziland, a Commonwealth mission renewed its call for the constitution to be reviewed so the kingdom could move toward democracy.

Richard Rooney

Search This Blog

Wednesday, 2 May 2018

SWAZI KING AND QUEENS OF BLING

Tuesday, 1 May 2018

SHUN THE BOGUS SWAZILAND ELECTION