Search This Blog

Friday, 15 November 2013

FILM SHOWS DARK SIDE OF SWAZILAND


New film shows dark side of Swaziland, but also light at the end of the tunnel
Kenworthy News Media, November 13, 2013
 
The newly released film “The King and the People”, directed by Zimmedia owner Simon Bright, gives an historic insight into the tiny absolute kingdom of Swaziland, and it shows the brutal nature of the regime that runs the country, as well as the pervasive corruption, lack of media and other freedoms, poverty and inequality, writes Kenworthy News Media.

But the film also shows the growing hope of a more democratic and equal society that is epitomized by the country’s democratic movement, unions and civil society. 

Absolute monarch King Mswati III of Swaziland, a personal trustee of a national fund of ten billion dollars who has a personal fortune of 100 million dollars, is one of the richest leaders in Africa but rules a country where two thirds of the population survive on less than a dollar a day, many on food aid.

“You want to feed your family, but you can’t – there’s no money and no jobs,” as a woman in Swaziland’s rural areas says in the film.

“These gross inequalities are the result of a political system in crisis,” the film concludes – a political system where political parties are banned and manifestations of opposition to the regime brutally repressed, where farmers can be evicted without compensation on the whim of the king, and where few outside the royal family and their supporters benefit from Swaziland’s agricultural and mineral wealth.

Historically, however, many Swazis have been reluctant to openly oppose the monarchy. “We have been born out of a society that encourages you not to challenge, not to question, keep quit, don’t be problematic. Then you will survive” as Swaziland United Democratic Front Coordinator Wandile Dludlu says in the film. “At the hands of an oppressor the best weapon is the mind of the oppressed.”

But there is a sense of change driven by the growing desire for a democratic form of government, the film says. Demonstrations and strikes continue and calls for democracy and socio-economic justice are driven by trade unions, progressive political parties and civil society. People everywhere are demanding change.

“People are now willing to speak out. People are talking about the system of governance, of this year’s elections and the need to open up for a multi-party dispensation and the activeness of political parties,” says Lomcebo Dlamini from the Swaziland Coalition of Concerned Civic Organisations.

The film will premiere in Denmark (having already premiered in several other countries) on November 17 at Africa Contact’s offices in Copenhagen, where PUDEMO President Mario Masuku will speak about the political situation in Swaziland. Read more here (in Danish)  or here (English Google translation).

Monday, 11 November 2013

POST-DEMOCRATIC SWAZILAND THOUGHTS

Kenworthy News Media, 11 November 2013
Will a post-democratic Swaziland be a ‘nation united’?

Understandably, people in Swaziland are focused on and eager to bring about democratic change. After all, it is the corrupt and brutal absolute monarchy of King Mswati III that is to a large degree responsible for the mass-poverty, inequality, financial disorder, and lack of freedom of speech and assembly in Swaziland, writes Kenworthy News Media.

But it is equally important to focus on what Swaziland will look like upon achieving the multi-party democracy that the majority of Swazis seemingly want. Neighbouring South Africa, for example, might have had a non-racial multi-party democracy for nearly twenty years, but the ruling ANC hasn’t been able or willing to extend its political victories to widespread socio-economic progress for South Africa’s many poor.

This is why Mario Masuku, President of Swaziland’s largest political party, the proscribed People’s United Democratic Movement (PUDEMO), has recently reiterated that Pudemo must be ready to anticipate and campaign in a multi-party election, to be able to build politically on the fact that they “enjoy massive support across Swaziland while some of the other parties are merely opportunistic,” as PUDEMO President Mario Masuku puts it.

But PUDEMO are not alone in actively anticipating the implementation of multi-party democracy in Swaziland. The traditional movement, Sive Siyinqaba (siSwati for “nation united”, also known by its slogan, Sibahle Sinje, “we are beautiful as we are”) was formed in 1996 to shield Swazi culture from outside influences and to try and quell the influence of PUDEMO and the trade union movement.

The policies of Sive Siyinqaba are free market orientated, but value state intervention and indigenisation of the economy. According to its constitution, Sive Siyinqaba will “protect and conserve Swazi heritage in all its forms from indiscriminate degradation, contempt and ridicule and facilitate changes thereto where such are necessary.” In effect, the party is claiming that true democracy will erode Swaziland’s cultural identity and create disharmony.

“Sive Siyinqaba was formed with the objective of countering the moves by PUDEMO towards a nominal democratisation of the country, claiming to defend the traditions and the sustainment of the Tinkundla system of government,” Mario Masuku says.

“But from 1998, Sive Siyinqaba shifted goal posts to say that they are a political entity and that their method is to ‘change the system from within’. But as they do not interfere with the monarch or the Tinkundla system, the question we ask is – ‘change what’?,” Mario Masukus asks rhetorically. “Most of their members are former MP’s or Cabinet Ministers, so they are seated on both sides of the fence.”

Marwick Khumalo, the MP for Lobamba Lomdzala  who is the face of Sive Siyinqaba as well as being one of the forming members of the movement, has been an MP in Swaziland’s lower house for the last 15 years, and allegedly the party has held anywhere between 25% and 60% of the seats in Swaziland’s Parliament – although as it illegal to run for office on a party ticket so no-one really knows.

Khumalo was even elected Speaker of the House, but was “dropped like a hot potato” in violation of Swaziland’s constitution, as Swazi Magazine The Nation put it, because absolute Monarch King Mswati III “wanted him out.” And Khumalo was one of the most vocal MP’s in speaking for last year’s vote of no confidence in the Swaziland’s Cabinet, although King Mswati III – again in violation of the constitution – declined to do so.

So one has to ask oneself what, if anything, has Sive Siyinqaba and other parties who claim to be “changing the system from the inside” achieved. And do they truly want to change the Tinkundla system once they have been sworn in as MP’s who are bound to serve King Mswati III “or else”, with the honour and healthy pay check that goes with it?

That Sive Siyinqaba stated earlier in the year that they “fully support the monarch” and that “the King has done a lot by returning constitutionalism and in particular the basic right for citizens to associate and discuss the future of their country,” should be a good indication of where Sive Siyinqaba’s sympathies really lie.

And the fact that “insider”-parties such as Sive Siyinqaba do not receive the same harsh treatment by the authorities also indicates that the authorities are a lot more sympathetic towards towards them than the parties who advocate real change, as is the fact that Mswati’s half-brother, Prince Guduza, who was the speaker of the Lower House in the last parliament, “is part of Sive Siqinqaba’s senior leadership”, according to Freedom House.

But people in Swaziland and outside need to also understand the threat that parties such as Sive Siyinqaba pose to the democratisation of Swaziland, even after multi-party democracy has been achieved. With their potential support in the rural areas, that are more culturally conservative and tend to equate Swazi culture with the monarchy. And with their experience of election campaigns, the fact that they are allying themselves with other parties, and the potential of a significant financial backing of the party by a King and the Royal elite who have no shortage of funds.

So PUDEMO and those who wish to see a true democratisation of Swaziland need to win both the political struggle for multi-party democracy, the struggle for funds to run election campaigns, but also the battle of cultural consciousness that will determine how Swazi culture is framed.

NEW NATIONAL AIRLINE A WASTE OF MONEY

The Swaziland Government proposal to set up its own national airline to use at the kingdom’s proposed Sikhuphe Airport is a waste of time and money.

It is estimated a single aircraft for the airline would cost E700 million (US$70 million). This compares to the E125 million budgeted for free primary school education in Swaziland this year.

Swaziland Civil Aviation Authority (SWACAA) says it needs to set up its own national airline to encourage international airlines to use the airport, which is being built 80km from the kingdom’s capital, Mbabane.

Sikhuphe is an on-going project to build an ‘international airport’ in the wilderness in Swaziland. Since the idea for the airport was first raised by King Mswati, who rules as sub-Saharan Africa’s last absolute monarch, more than 10 years ago independent observers have called it a waste of resources.

In 2003, the International Monetary Fund said it should not be built because it would divert funds away from much needed projects to fight poverty in Swaziland. About seven in ten of King Mswati’s 1.3 million subjects live in abject poverty, earning less than US$2 per day.

Meanwhile, the king has a lavish lifestyle, including a personal fortune, once estimated by Forbes magazine to be US$200 million, 13 palaces, a private jet and fleets of top-of-the range Mercedes and BMW cars.

Solomon Dube, Director of SWACAA was reported by local media saying Swaziland needed a national airline because every time he went abroad to market the new airport, ‘reputable airlines’ demanded that the kingdom should have a national airline which would ferry, on-transit passengers.

He said they wanted to buy a 90- to 100-seater jet that would cost around E700 million.

The Times Sunday, an independent newspaper in Swaziland, reported Dube saying big airliners agreed ‘in principle’ to bring passengers to Swaziland but wanted to know if these passengers would not be stuck in the kingdom.

‘They all demand that we have a national airline that will transport the many passengers they would be transporting from all over the world to Southern Africa,’ he said.

‘They want us to distribute passengers from Europe to Sikhuphe Airport if they are travelling to places like Zimbabwe and Botswana for example,’ he said.

‘They tell us that they do not want their important passengers to be stranded in a Third World country and, therefore, if we want them to use our airport, we should also have a national airline which they would work with.’

Dube did not reveal how many aircraft would be needed to fulfil this role.

Dube and the Swazi Government have forgotten one important point. The only reason passengers would fly to Swaziland was because they kingdom was their final destination. If they wanted to go to some other country in southern Africa they would fly into airports in neighbouring South Africa and take already existing routes to their intended destination.

So, setting up a national airline for Swaziland would have no effect on that.

Dube has made a number of unsustainable statements in an attempt to ‘talk-up’ the airport and its usefulness.

Last month (October 2013) he claimed SWACAA had targeted small and medium business travellers to use the airport. He said low-cost airlines were interested in using Sikhuphe for business travellers who might want to fly to nearby countries ‘on a daily basis’.

It was, of course, fanciful, since there is an existing airport at Matsapha and if there was such a market it would already be met.

Dube insisted last month that Sikhuphe would be operational by the end of October 2013, but there are no signs that it is. To date no international airline has announced it intends to use Sikhuphe when it eventually opens.

See also

KING’S VANITY COMES BEFORE THE POOR

KING’S FAMILY GET TOP POLITICAL JOBS

King Mswati III of Swaziland has appointed another 16 members of his Royal Family to top political jobs; effectively carving up public life in the kingdom in his favour.

This is in addition to the nine princes and princesses he has already appointed to the House of Assembly and the Senate.

King Mswati, who rules Swaziland as sub-Saharan Africa’s last absolute monarch, has also appointed 16 members of the Dlamini clan, which he heads.

There are nine princess and princesses and a further seven from the family Dlamini in the 24-strong Liqoqo (the Swaziland National Council), the most powerful of the committees that nominally advises the King.

There are four princes and princesses and four Dlaminis in the Ludzidzimi Council, which advises the King’s mother.

The Border Restoration Committee, which exists to try to get South Africa to give some of its territory to King Mswati, has three princes and princesses and five Dlaminis among its 14 members.

Previously, King Mswati reappointed Barnabas Dlamini as Prime Minister and appointed Paul Dlamini as Deputy Prime Minister for the first time.

The appointments follow the national elections that took place in September 2013. All political parties were banned from taking part and the Swazi people were only allowed to elect 55 of the 65 members of the House of Assembly. The King appointed the remaining ten. The King appointed 20 of the 30 members of the Senate House, with the other 10 elected by members of the House of Assembly. None were elected by the people.

Shortly before the election, King Mswati announced he had received a vision during a thunderstorm which told him that henceforth the political system in his kingdom should be known as a ‘monarchical democracy’. He said this would be ‘a system formed by merging the will of the people with the monarch’.

He went on to say in this system, people cast votes on a ballot box to decide leaders from community level. These leaders then work with the monarch in governing the country.

However, the new appointments are overwhelmingly of people who did not stand for election.

The power wielded by King Mswati was criticised by two independent international groups which observed the Swazi election. Both the African Union and the Commonwealth Observer Mission suggested the kingdom’s constitution should be reviewed and political parties be allowed to contest elections.

The Commonwealth Observer Mission added that, ‘The presence of the monarch in the structure of everyday political life inevitably associates the institution of the monarchy with politics, a situation that runs counter to the development that the re-establishment of the Parliament and the devolution of executive authority into the hands of elected officials.’

See also

SWAZI KING KEEPS IT IN THE FAMILY
NO TOP PARLIAMENTARIANS WERE ELECTED
KING APPOINTS SIX OF HIS FAMILY TO SENATE

PROMISE TO OPEN KING’S AIRPORT BROKEN

Sikhuphe International Airport in Swaziland, dubbed by independent observers as ‘King Mswati III’s vanity project’, is supposed to be open and operational, but there are no obvious signs that it is.
Solomon Dube, director of the Swaziland Civil Aviation Authority (SWACAA), was widely reported in the Swazi media last month saying the airport would be ‘fully licenced and operational’ by now. 

The Times Sunday, an independent newspaper in the kingdom, reported Dube saying he was ‘sure, confident and optimistic’ about a late October or early November date because the facility licencing was ongoing and was being undertaken by his department.

But, we still await the first plane to touch down and if recent history is a guide, the opening will not take place in the foreseeable future.

Sikhuphe has been widely criticised as a vanity project for the King, who rules Swaziland as sub-Saharan Africa’s last absolute monarch.  The King is keen to show that his kingdom is on its way to becoming a ‘first world’ nation.

As long ago as 2003, the International Monetary Fund said it should not be built because it would divert funds away from much needed projects to fight poverty in Swaziland. About seven in ten of King Mswati’s 1.3 million subjects live in abject poverty, earning less than US$2 per day.

It was first announced that it would open in June 2010, and its opening has been delayed many times since.

There is no obvious need for the new airport which is being built in the Swazi wilderness 80 kilometres east of the Swazi capital Mbabane.

Major airports already exist less than an hour’s flying time away in South Africa with connecting routes to Swaziland and there is no reason to suspect passengers would want to use the airport at Sikhuphe as an alternative.

There has never been a needs analysis undertaken on the airport, and Swaziland’s present airport at Matsapha only carries about 70,000 passengers a year. Swaziland Airlink, a joint venture between South African Airlink and the Swaziland government, is the only carrier using the airport and only flies to OR Tambo at Johannesburg.

SWACAA has forecast an annual passenger turnover of 250 000 to 300 000 for Sikhuphe (this equates to 822 passengers on average per day), but so far no international airline has said it wants to use the airport.

Media reports in Swaziland suggest the cost of Sikhuphe is about E3 billion (US$300 million) so far.

As recently as October 2013 a report from the International Air Transport Association (IATA) said Sikhuphe International Airport was widely perceived as a ‘vanity project’ because of its scale and opulence compared with the size and nature of the market it seeks to serve.

In June 2013 an engineer’s report was published by to the Mail and Guardian newspaper in South Africa saying the structure of the airport was defected and large jet airlines would not be able to land,

See also

KING’S VANITY COMES BEFORE THE POOR
KING’S AIRPORT ‘WILL BE UNUSABLE’
KING’S AIRPORT NOT READY UNTIL 2016

Friday, 8 November 2013

FOOTBALL BOYCOTT CALL GROWING

The President of the South African Football Association Danny Jordaan has hinted he backs a call to cancel a match with Swaziland in protest against King Mswati III’s undemocratic rule.

But, he said the friendly international between Swaziland and South Africa on 15 November 2013 would go ahead.

Jordaan was reacting to a demand by the Congress of South African Trade Unions (COSATU) for the match to be cancelled. COSATU said it was in protest against King Mswati III’s ‘brutal monarchist dictatorship’.

COSATU said, ‘This absolute monarch denies the people the most basic of democratic rights. He has banned political parties. He refuses to recognise the legitimate trade union organisation TUCOSWA. He uses force and fear to intimidate and subjugate the people of Swaziland.

‘Meanwhile he continues to loot the state resources to feed himself and his rapacious criminal family, at a time when the Swaziland economy and its health system are collapsing and poverty levels have escalated.’

Reacting to COSATU, Jordaan told the Sowetan newspaper in South Africa, ‘We share the Cosatu sentiment, we will organise a meeting with them but it is too late for the game to be called off.’

Meanwhile, support for the boycott is growing. Young Communist League of South Africa said in a statement, ‘We as South Africans know precisely the relevance of this boycott because of the key role played by international solidarity in bringing down the system that was declared a crime against humanity in the form of apartheid.’

The Swaziland Democracy Campaign (SDC) said in a statement,’ Football and many other activities are promoted by the Royal Elite to give the impression that Swaziland is a ‘normal’ country. But this is not the truth.  Swaziland is our continents last absolute dictatorship. Its people are denied, by force, the right to enjoy even the most basic of democratic rights. For these reasons, footballers cannot escape their responsibility to humanity, to the millions who love the beautiful game.’

It added, ‘Whether soccer fans and players like it or not, the Mswati regime will benefit politically and financially if the match goes ahead.’

The People’s United Democratic Movement (PUDEMO) and the Swaziland Solidarity Network have already given support to the boycott.

See also

SWAZIS SUPPORT FOOTBALL BOYCOTT CALL

Thursday, 7 November 2013

KING GIVES TOP JOB TO HIS DAUGHTER

King Mswati III of Swaziland has appointed his eldest daughter Princess Sikhanyiso, aged 23, to Liqoqo, the most powerful advisory committee in his kingdom.

Liqoqo, also known as the Swaziland National Council, has the key role in Swaziland, where the King rules as an absolute monarch.

The King’s advisers on Liqoqo are all traditionalists and are in charge of interpreting ‘Swazi Law and Custom’. The laws and customs are administered by chiefs who rule over their subjects in the name of the King. The laws and customs operate outside of the constitution.

In all matters, the King defers to Liqoqo. King Mswati avoids taking advice from the House of Assembly, which has 55 of its 65 members elected by the people. It is generally accepted in Swaziland that Liqoqo can veto any decision made by the Swazi Parliament.

During the political crisis of October 2012 when the House of Assembly passed a vote of no confidence in the government and according to the Constitution the monarch was obliged to sack it, King Mswati went to Liqoqo which told him he could ignore the Constitution. He did so safe in the knowledge that the traditionalists whom he had appointed would do nothing to support the members of parliament, some of whom had been elected by the people.

Princess Sikhanyiso has never worked in her life, although nominally she is a police officer. She was appointed to the force in 2010. She also sits on the board of MTN-Swaziland, the only mobile phone company in Swaziland. King Mswati is reported to have a substantial personal investment in MTN.

Princess Sikhanyiso graduated from Sydney University, Australia, in 2012 with a Masters in Digital Communication. She has also studied acting and modelling in the US.

If she is known at all, it is for her attempt to build a career as a ‘rap’ singer under the names of ‘Pashu’, or ‘Passionfruit.’

She is the eldest of King Mswati’s children which are believed to number at least 26.

PRIME MINSTER WRONG ON HUMAN RIGHTS

No observer of events in Swaziland over the past year can take seriously the reappointed Prime Minster Barnabas Dlamini’s claim that, ‘Government will ensure that the justice system is administered swiftly and efficiently and maintenance of law and order will be secured in accordance with the highest human rights standards.’

Dlamini was personally reappointed Prime Minister by King Mswati III, who rules Swaziland as sub-Saharan Africa’s last absolute monarch. Dlamini has never been elected to public office by the people. He made his comment during the swearing-in ceremony of newly-appointed Cabinet ministers.

In his previous three terms as PM, Dlamini rode roughshod over the rights of the Swazi people sending police and security forces to break up any prodemocracy activities in the kingdom.

International organisations have over the past year highlighted numerous human rights abuses.

As recently as July 2013, AfriMAP, a group that monitors and promotes good governance, reported, ‘The current form of governance in Swaziland is a complete anathema to the conventional wisdom that prevails in almost all AU [African Union] member states, and certainly in SADC [South African Development Community]; the issue of dictatorships, absolutism and total state control of the citizenry is a forgotten and unacceptable notion; which is why Swaziland government must realize that it cannot delay political reforms, since it will only undermine its credibility, delay progress, economic and social development of the very people it is supposed to uplift and protect.’ 

A report on human rights in Swaziland, published in 2013 by the US State Department revealed, ‘The three main human rights abuses [in 2012] were police use of excessive force, including use of torture, beatings, and unlawful killings; restrictions on freedoms of association, assembly, and speech; and discrimination and abuse of women and children.

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

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

In May 2013, in its annual report on Swaziland, Amnesty International reported, rights to freedom of expression, association and peaceful assembly continued to be violated in the kingdom. There were also ‘arbitrary arrests and excessive force used to crush political protests,’ the report stated, and ‘torture and other ill-treatment remained a persistent concern’ in Swaziland.

Amnesty noted that in May 2012 the African Commission on Human Rights adopted a resolution ‘expressing alarm’ at the Swazi Government’s failure to implement previous decisions and recommendations of the Commission relating to the rights of freedom of expression, association, and assembly.

These violations included the use by police of, ‘rubber bullets, tear gas and batons to break up demonstrations and gatherings viewed as illegal’.

In April 2013, the Open Society Initiative for Southern Africa (OSISA) reported that recently Swaziland police and state security forces had shown ‘increasingly violent and abusive behaviour’ that was leading to the ‘militarization’ of the kingdom.

OSISA told the African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights (ACHPR) meeting in The Gambia, ‘There are also reliable reports of a general militarization of the country through the deployment of the Swazi army, police and correctional services to clamp down on any peaceful protest action by labour or civil society organisations ahead of the country’s undemocratic elections.’

In April 2013, the Swaziland United Democratic Front (SUDF) and the Swaziland Democracy Campaign (SDC), two organiastions campaigning for democracy in the kingdom, in a joint statement said police in Swaziland were now a ‘private militia’ with the sole purpose of serving the Royal regime. This was after about 80 armed officers broke up a public meeting to discuss the lack of democracy in the kingdom.

See also

PM ‘INCOMPETENT, UNTRUSTWORTHY, VAIN’
HUMAN RIGHTS ABUSER SET TO BE PM
http://swazimedia.blogspot.com/2013/10/human-rights-abuser-set-to-be-pm.html

SWAZIS SUPPORT FOOTBALL BOYCOTT CALL

Two of Swaziland’s major prodemocracy groups have backed a call for the South African Football Association (SAFA) to boycott a match against the kingdom.

In separate statements the Swaziland Solidarity Network (SSN) and the People’s United Democratic Movement (PUDEMO) supported the move to put pressure on King Mswati III’s, who runs the kingdom as an absolute monarch.

Swaziland is due to play South Africa in a friendly match on 15 November 2013. The Congress of South African Trade Unions (COSATU) called for the match to be stopped as part of its on-going support of a cultural boycott against King Mswati.

In a statement the SSN said the COSATU ban was, ‘part of a programme of smart sanctions designed to put pressure on King Mswati to respect human rights and allow democracy in that country’.

SSN added, ‘It is our understanding that football, especially in Africa, is a very powerful sport, which has historically been used positively and negatively to affect the socio-economic realities of ordinary people. This plea gives SAFA an opportunity to raise its profile within the region and in the country as a champion of human rights and democracy.’

PUDEMO, in a statement said if the match went ahead its members would disrupt it.

It added, ‘Our experience is that King Mswati uses such events to feign some legitimacy and present his undemocratic kingdom as credible to the unsuspecting world.

‘In 2006 we called for targeted sanctions against the undemocratic Swazi regime with specific appeal for a cultural, military, economic and sports boycott. COSATU’s call therefore is in response to our appeal to boycott this regime and expose it for the fiefdom that it is.’

PUDEMO added, ‘King Mswati is averse to international scrutiny and humiliation and a cancellation of the match on the basis that Swaziland is an undemocratic and illegitimate state will surely rattle him. He will know that his government will no longer enjoy legitimacy and be an island of dictatorship in a sea of democracy.’

Calling for the boycott, COSATU called King Mswati’s regime a ‘brutal monarchist dictatorship’.

It said, ‘This absolute monarch denies the people the most basic of democratic rights. He has banned political parties. He refuses to recognise the legitimate trade union organisation TUCOSWA. He uses force and fear to intimidate and subjugate the people of Swaziland.

‘Meanwhile he continues to loot the state resources to feed himself and his rapacious criminal family, at a time when the Swaziland economy and its health system are collapsing and poverty levels have escalated.’

See also

‘CANCEL MATCH IN PROTEST AGAINST KING’

Wednesday, 6 November 2013

‘CANCEL MATCH IN PROTEST AGAINST KING’

South African trade unionists have called for a football match with Swaziland to be cancelled as a protest against King Mswati III’s ‘brutal monarchist dictatorship’.

Bafana Bafana, the South African national football team, is due to play Swaziland in a friendly match in the Swazi capital Mbabane on 15 November 2013.

The Congress of South African Trade Unions (COSATU) has called on the South African Football Association to cancel the match in protest against the king who rules Swaziland as sub-Saharan Africa’s last absolute monarch.

In a statement COSATU called King Mswati’s regime a ‘brutal monarchist dictatorship’.

It said, ‘This absolute monarch denies the people the most basic of democratic rights. He has banned political parties. He refuses to recognise the legitimate trade union organisation TUCOSWA. He uses force and fear to intimidate and subjugate the people of Swaziland.

‘Meanwhile he continues to loot the state resources to feed himself and his rapacious criminal family, at a time when the Swaziland economy and its health system are collapsing and poverty levels have escalated.’

The call is in line with the federation’s support for an ongoing cultural boycott of King Mswati’s Swaziland.

Prodemocracy groups are campaigning for a ban on political parties to be lifted and for the King’s political powers to be curtailed.

COSATU said, ‘But the ruling Swazi elite cannot stop the democratic will of the people from expressing itself. It is unable, despite beatings, bannings and jailings, to suppress the democratic spirit of the brave freedom-loving people of Swaziland.

‘That is why the democratic forces in Swaziland have asked for a cultural boycott, similar to the sport and cultural boycott against apartheid South Africa, which was such a key weapon in the struggle to isolate the racist regime.’

‘The aim of the boycott is to expose the true nature of the royal dictatorship and show the people that the rest of the world is on their side. It is a campaign that has been supported by hundreds of artists, musicians and actors from South Africa and around the world, and one in which COSATU has been a key player.’

It added the cancellation of the match, ‘will send a powerful message to the regime that the South African sporting community and the people as a whole reject the dictatorship and denial of human rights and democracy to the people’.

Tuesday, 5 November 2013

CHIEF’S THREAT TO EVICT 1,000 PEOPLE

A newly-appointed chief in Swaziland is threatening to evict nearly 1,000 of his subjects from grazing land if they do not pay him a fine the equivalent of more than six months income for many.

Chief Ndlovula of Motshane has told residents if they do not each pay a fine of E5,000 (US$500) their homes will be destroyed. In Swaziland seven in ten people earn less than E20 a day.

The chief stands to make about E5 million if the fines are paid.

He says his subjects have illegally built homes on land put aside for grazing.

Residents say in the past they donated one cow to the chief of the area by way of allegiance and this allowed them to stay on the land.

The case highlights that chiefs in Swaziland have enormous powers over their subjects, because they are personally appointed by King Mswati III, sub-Saharan Africa’s last absolute monarch, and traditionally they lead a band of area elders. They can decide who lives where and some have been known to banish people from their homes for not obeying rules. Sometimes chiefs demand tithes from their subjects such as a beast or money.

Chiefs also settle disputes such as over land, accusations of witchcraft, and wandering livestock that harm someone’s crops. Many also settle criminal disputes that probably should best be left to magistrates.

Chiefs are given stipends by the national treasury, but not salaries, and community members pay their allegiance to chiefs by weeding and harvesting their fields, and constructing the traditional mud and thatch huts usually found at chiefs’ homesteads.

In Swaziland chiefs do the king’s bidding at a local level. People know not to mess with the chief because their livelihood depends on his goodwill. In some parts of Swaziland the chiefs are given the power to decide who gets food that has been donated by international agencies and then the chiefs quite literally have power of life and death in such cases and with about a third of the population of Swaziland receiving food aid last year.

Chiefs can and do take revenge on their subjects who disobey them. There is a catalogue of cases in Swaziland. For example, Chief Dambuza Lukhele of Ngobelweni in the Shiselweni region banned his subjects from ploughing their fields because some of them defied his order to build a hut for one of his wives.

Nhlonipho Nkamane Mkhatswa, chief of Lwandle in Manzini, the main commercial city in Swaziland, reportedly stripped a woman of her clothing in the middle of a Swazi street in full view of the public because she was wearing trousers against his orders,

Chiefs know they have the backing of the king if things go wrong.  Zwide Nxumalo defied a court order to stop being chief of the Ezikhotheni area in the Shiselweni region of Swaziland because he was appointed to the post by King Mswati III. Magistrates told him he could not go ahead with a sibhimbi ceremony that officially introduces a new chief to his subjects because of a dispute about whether he had been correctly chosen as chief. So he went to the ceremony anyway.

KING MSWATI CONTROLS NEW CABINET

More than half of the new Cabinet ministers in the Swaziland Government were not elected by the people.
Out of 19 ministers King Mswati III personally appointed 11 to the House of Assembly or to the Senate.

King Mswati rules Swaziland as sub-Saharan Africa’s last absolute monarch. At national elections held in September the people were only permitted to elect 55 members of the 65-seat House of Assembly. The King chose the other 10. Political parties were banned from taking part in the election.

The King also chose 20 of the 30-strong Senate House. The other 10 were elected by members of the House of Assembly. None were elected by the people.

Prior to appointing his cabinet, King Mswati demonstrated his complete control of politics in the kingdom. All the top parliamentary office holders in Swaziland were filled by people he appointed and none were elected by the people. They were the Prime Minister, the Speaker of the House of Assembly, the President and Deputy President of Senate.

The King appointed six of his own family to the Senate and another six family and clan members to the House of Assembly.

Following September’s election international observer missions criticised the lack of democracy in Swaziland. The Commonwealth Observer Mission in particular called for King Mswati’s political powers to be revised.

It said, ‘The presence of the monarch in the structure of everyday political life inevitably associates the institution of the monarchy with politics, a situation that runs counter to the development that the re-establishment of the Parliament and the devolution of executive authority into the hands of elected officials.’

It called for Swaziland’s Constitution to be reviewed.

See also

NO TOP PARLIAMENTARIANS WERE ELECTED
KING APPOINTS SIX OF HIS FAMILY TO SENATE

Monday, 4 November 2013

NEW DIGEST ON FREEDOM IN SWAZILAND

With the elections in Swaziland over, things returned to normal in the kingdom in October. King Mswati III appointed 12 of his family to sit in the House of assembly and the Senate. His chosen candidate was elected unopposed as Speaker of the House and he appointed Barnabas Dlamini as Prime Minister for the fourth time, despite Dlamini’s record of incompetence, untrustworthiness and vanity.

Two reports from international observers of September’s election were published this month. Both the African Union and Commonwealth election mission teams recognised that the election was far from fair. Political parties are banned from taking part and there were severe issues around freedoms of association and speech. Both organisations called for Swaziland’s 2005 election to be reviewed.

There is little chance that King Mswati, who rules Swaziland as sub-Saharan Africa’s last absolute monarch, will take any notice. The Commonwealth team admitted it had voiced similar concerns in the past two elections in Swaziland in 2008 and 2003 with no effect.

Elsewhere, King Mswati surprised few when he told a group of Christians that men had lived on the Moon for several months in the past. He said he wanted Swazis to do the same thing. His adoring audience cried ‘Hail to the King!’ in vernacular.

These reports and others are contained in Swaziland: Striving for Freedom, the latest monthly digest from Swazi Media Commentary. It is available free of charge on scribd dot com.

Swazi Media Commentary is published online – updated most days – bringing information, comment and analysis in support of democracy in the kingdom.

Swazi Media Commentary has no physical base and is completely independent of any political faction and receives no income from any individual or organisation. People who contribute ideas or write for it do so as volunteers and receive no payment.


Friday, 1 November 2013

CHIEF JUSTICE THREATENS MEDIA

The Chief Justice of Swaziland Michael Ramodibedi has threatened local media against scandalising courts, after newspapers criticised him.

Ramodibedi and two other Swazi judges made a public statement after newspapers criticised Ramodibedi’s involvement in a High Court case involving a High Court Clerk, Sabatha Gumedze, who had resisted an attempt to transfer her to the Manzini Magistrates Court.

The statement from the CJ, jointly written with Justices Bheki Maphalala and Mumcy Dlamini, read ‘We must take this opportunity to warn the newspapers that scandalising the courts is an offence called contempt of court. In this matter the newspapers published a malicious story that the Chief Justice presided over a matter he dealt with prior to litigation.

‘That was completely false and those newspapers know it for a fact. It is for that reason that no application for recusal was made. Similarly, the so called law experts do a disservice to the nation by giving false legal opinions to newspapers. Genuine law experts make submissions in court.’

The threat to journalists of punishment for scandalising the court is a real one in Swaziland.

In April 2013 Bheki Makhubu, the editor of the Nation magazine, was convicted of ‘scandalising the court’ because he criticised the Swazi judiciary. He was fined E200,000 (US$22,000) by the High Court and told if he did not pay within three days he would immediately go to jail for two years.

His sentence is on hold pending an appeal to the Swaziland Supreme Court.

See also

OSISA: JUDGES ATTACK PRESS FREEDOM

MPS PRAISE KING ON THEIR KNEES

Swaziland’s new members of parliament got down on their knees before King Mswati III to pledge their allegiance to him and one by one made a speech praising him.

This is the ritual at the start of the new parliament in Swaziland, where the king rules as an absolute monarch.

Each MP is required to make a speech lasting no longer than three minutes in which he or she is expected to tell the king how much they love and respect him.

The two daily newspapers in Swaziland had extensive coverage of the ritual on Friday (1 November 2013). Both the Swazi Observer, which is in effect owed by the king, and the Times of Swaziland, the only independent daily newspaper in the kingdom, gave extensive coverage to the speech of newly-elected MP Jan Sithole.

Sithole is the leader of a relatively new political party in Swaziland called the Swaziland Democratic Party (SWADEPA). All political parties were banned from taking part in Swaziland’s national election on 20 September 2013, but Sithole stood as an individual, even though his political affiliations were well-known.
SWADEPA wants political reform in Swaziland, including an un-banning of political parties and greater freedom of speech and of assembly.

The Times of Swaziland reported Sithole ‘pledged support’ to the king in a five-minute speech in the ceremony at Lozitha Palace. The newspaper reported Sithole said his party respected the king and praised him for introducing a new constitution into Swaziland in 2005.

The Swazi Observer reported Sithole said he was not going to dump his party now that he was MP.
The Observer also reported that many of the new MPs and senators praised the king for reappointing Barnabas Dlamini, as Prime Minister. Dlamini has a controversial record as a serial human rights violator in Swaziland.

See also

‘PM INCOMPETENT, UNTRUSTWORTHY, VAIN’

Thursday, 31 October 2013

NO TOP PARLIAMENTARIANS WERE ELECTED



None of the major office holders in King Mswati III’s new parliament in Swaziland was elected by the people.


Zwane, who last week was appointed to the Senate by the king, was elected Senate president unopposed. This will be the third term that Zwane has served as Senate President.

Ngomuyayona Gamedze was also elected unopposed as Deputy President. Gamedze too was appointed to Senate by the king. It will also be Gamedze’s third term in the position.

All senior positions in the Swaziland Parliament have now been filled following the national election in September 2013. None of them were elected by the people.

The Prime Minister, the Speaker of the House of Assembly, the President and Deputy President of Senate were all appointed to Parliament by the king, who rules Swaziland as sub-Saharan Africa’s last absolute monarch.

In addition this week King Mswati appointed six members of his own family to the Senate and earlier this month he appointed a further six to the House of Assembly.

All political parties were banned from contesting the election in September. The people were only allowed to contest 55 of the 65 seats in the House of Assembly. King Mswati appointed the other 10. The king appointed 20 of the 30-strong Senate House. The other 10 were elected by members of the House of Assembly. None were elected by the people.

Following the election on 20 September two independent international organisations that monitored the poll separately called for the Swaziland Constitution to be rewritten.

The African Union mission reported 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 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.’

Separately, the Commonwealth Observer Mission said the constitution needed to be rewritten so that King Mswati’s powers were reduced. It also said political parties should be allowed.  


See also

AU WANTS REVIEW OF SWAZI CONSTITUTION


KING APPOINTS SIX OF HIS FAMILY TO SENATE