LUTFO: SWAZI MEDIA TALK IN RIDDLES

I wish the newspapers in Swaziland would stop talking in riddles about the Lutfo Dlamini corruption scandal.

Today (21 January 2011), it’s the turn of the Times of Swaziland, the kingdom’s only independent daily newspaper.

Its managing editor Mbongeni Mbingo writes about how the Swaziland Government Cabinet often talks about ‘collective responsibility’.

He then asks, ‘How does Cabinet reconcile this with what is happening with their colleague at foreign affairs?

‘We do not know as yet the extent of the problem that we are made to believe the minister has got to answer to, to his superiors, but I was just thinking that his colleagues would perhaps have taken the fall too.

‘But then again, perhaps this was a decision that did not involve Cabinet! Only time will tell, and the public waits, with bated breath.’

Indeed, if by the ‘public’ Mbingo means Times’ readers, they do indeed wait with baited breath to find out what’s going on. The rest of us know that Lutfo Dlamini, Minister of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation, and Phesheya Dlamini, Swaziland Ambassador to Kuwait, were both sacked from their jobs last week because they are implicated in a corruption scandal involving missing millions of emalengeni that was intended for King Mswati III, King of Swaziland and the last absolute monarch in sub-Saharan Africa.

Yesterday, the Swazi Observer, the newspaper in effect owned and edited by King Mswati, dribbled on about Lutfo Dlamini being away from work ‘sick’ and his cabinet post being assigned temporarily to Clement Dlamini, the Agriculture Minister.

We expect this misleading reporting from the Observer, but the Times claims to be an ‘independent’ newspaper. Could the people at the Times show us that independence and tell their readers what is really going on. Please.

MEDIA BAFFLE ON LUTFO SCANDAL

There must be a lot of people in Swaziland baffled about what’s happened to Lutfo Dlamini.

And the Swazi media are mainly to blame for this.

As readers to this blog know, Lutfo Dlamini, Minister for Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation, and Phesheya Dlamini, Swazi Ambassador to Kuwait, were picked up on Thursday (13 January 2011) by senior police officers and taken to see Barnabas Dlamini, Swaziland’s illegally-appointed Prime Minister.

Both Lutfo Dlamini and Phesheya Dlamini were sacked from their jobs. Both are heavily involved in a corruption scandal centred on missing money that the Kuwaiti Royal Family sent to King Mswati III, sub-Saharan Africa’s last absolute monarch.

But the Swazi media refuse to tell the Swazi people this. Instead the media either say nothing, or like the two newspaper groups in the kingdom, claim to their readers that there is some mystery to the meeting.

The Swazi Observer, the newspaper in effect owned and edited by King Mswati, even reported ‘Staff at Lutfo’s ministry was left bemused by the “invasion” of the police and wondered what the minister had done to be “visited” by senior police officers who looked mean.’

The Weekend Observer today (15 January 2011), plays a dirty trick on its readers. It knows full well why the Dlamini twins were called to Thursday’s meeting, but it claimed in a report that Phesheya Dlamini might have been called to see Barnabas Dlamini, because the PM holds a grudge against Phesheya because, in 2003, while Swaziland’s’ Attorney General, he sent an SMS text message to Barnabas Dlamini telling him that the king had sacked him from the premiership. The Observer suggests that Barnabas has been biding his time all these years to get back at Phesheya.

There was no need for all this media deceit, because three days previous to the police visit; it had been revealed across the globe that Lutfo Dlamini and Phesheya Dlamini, were implicated in the Kuwaiti corruption.

Of course the Observer won’t tell the Swazi people any of this. We know, because Alec Lushaba, editor of the Weekend Observer told us last week, that the Observer newspapers won’t report anything about the Swazi Royal Family without the King’s permission. Permission in this case was clearly denied.

If we accept that the Observer is simply a propaganda rag for King Mswati, why did it bother to report the meeting at all? By turning the events of this week into a mystery it not only deceives its readers, but it shows utter contempt for them.

The Observer hit new depths (even by its own low standards) and managed to turn the political crisis into a fashion show. Instead of levelling with the Swazi people about what was going on, it chose to publish 380 words on how the participants arrived at the meeting and what they were wearing.

I do not lie to you.

So, we learnt that ‘top lawyer’ Musa Dlamini arrived ‘clad in a navy blue suit blended with a white shirt. The blazer was on his left hand while the other hand was in his pocket’.

Ambassador Phesheya Dlamini ‘was in traditional attire’.

Minister of Justice David Matse, ‘looked conservative in a green suit’.

The star of the show Lutfo Dlamini was in ‘white attire (trouser and shirt) with brown shoes’.

The Times of Swaziland, the kingdom’s only independent daily newspaper, didn’t do much better. It too mistook the crisis for a fashion show, but decided to feature fewer models in its catwalk commentary.

WHY IS ‘TIMES’ SUCKING UP TO PM?

The Times of Swaziland is getting too close to Barnabas Dlamini, the illegally-appointed Prime Minister.

The Times, the only independent daily newspaper in the kingdom, today (7 January 2011) publishes a report that one of the PM’s closest allies, along with a ‘flamboyant ambassador’, are about to be sacked from the Cabinet over a ‘botched business deal worth millions of Emalangeni’.

But, the Times doesn’t name the pair involved, saying, ‘The minister and the ambassador are known to this newspaper, but their names will not be revealed for now.’

But why not tell us? There is no legal or ethical reason to withhold the names, as long as you give the accused a chance to put their side of the story.

The answer almost certainly is that the Times is doing Prime Minister Dlamini’s bidding. In the report, the Times lets the PM say (more or less) that he will tell the media what’s going on when he is good and ready.

But, why let the PM get away with that? A clue may be in this sentence from the report, ‘In an interview on Wednesday, the prime minister, in his usual jocular mood, elected to down-play the issue of the looming Cabinet reshuffle.’

Did you get that? The PM ‘in his usual jovial manner’. Who says he’s ‘jovial’? Why the Times, of course. And why bother to describe his mood as jovial unless the Times wanted its readers to warm to the PM. And as for ‘down-play the issue? what is it that the PM doesn’t want us to know? And why won’t the Times behave like an independent newspaper and tell us?

This isn’t the first time that the Times has overstepped the boundary between independent newspaper and lackey to the Prime Minister.

Last month (December 2010), in an astonishing interview with the PM, the Times congratulated Dlamini (who is presently embroiled in a corruption scandal regarding the sale of government land) on his handling of the economic crisis engulfing Swaziland. This was when any truly independent observer could see that he and his government’s policies are largely to blame for that crisis.

The Times also let him to tell blatant lies. Dlamini was allowed to say he is not a ‘vindictive’ person and he is not intolerant to criticism.

This is the same Dlamini, whose government vindictively locked up Mario Masuku, President of the People’s United Democratic Movement (PUDEMO), for nearly a year on trumped up terrorism charges. When Masuku eventually appeared in court in September 2009, he was released within hours.

This is the same Dlamini who in September 2010 said he wanted to torture by whipping their feet, foreigners who criticised his government. That’s not very tolerant.

The coverage of Dlamini tarnishes any reputation the Times might have for independence. For sure, that reputation isn’t very high, but the failings of the Times – like other news media in Swaziland – usually rests on its willingness to censor itself or be censored. In this way it makes decisions about what not to publish.

Its present attitude to Dlamini is of an entirely different nature: this is about a proactive decision to publish. The Times has chosen, without coercion, to publish positive reports about the Prime Minister and it is unclear (to me, at least) what it expects to gain from this.

It won’t win it more readers (it could easily lose it some) because nobody wants to read propaganda - that’s what the Swazi Observer, the newspaper in effect owned by King Mswati, sub-Saharan Africa’s last absolute monarch, is for.

The Times needs to decide quickly whether it wants to be a newspaper or just another branch of Swazi Government propaganda.

See also

ILLEGAL SWAZILAND PM CRACKS DOWN

http://swazimedia.blogspot.com/2010/06/illegal-swaziland-pm-cracks-down.html

SWAZI P.M. EXPOSED ON TERROR ACT

http://swazimedia.blogspot.com/2009/01/swazi-pm-exposed-on-terror-act.html

SWAZI PM: I CONTROL THE MEDIA

http://swazimedia.blogspot.com/2010/05/swazi-pm-i-control-media.html

PLOT TO REVIVE SWAZI KING’S PARTY

We should not welcome the report that a plot is afoot to revive the Imbokodvo National Movement (INM) political party.

This is not a move towards democracy in Swaziland: in the past the INM was a front for the Swazi monarchy.

The Times of Swaziland reported yesterday (31 December 2010) that ‘a prince, a member of the King’s Advisory Council and an employee of the King’s Office’ were ‘behind a plot’ to revive the party. The Times says all three ‘work very closely with royalty’.

According to the Times, the plotters say King Mswati III, sub-Saharan Africa’s last absolute monarch, supports the revival of the party.

The INM was formed by the king’s father King Sobhuza II and his advisory council, the Swaziland National Council (liqoqo), to contest Swaziland’s election in 1964, which was held prior to the kingdom’s independence from Great Britain in 1968.

The INM’s platform focused on assistance to peasants, labelled the other parties as ‘foreign’, divisive and hostile to Swazi ‘tradition’ and sought to keep traditional land tenure unchanged while vesting mineral rights, like land, in the hands of the monarchy.

The INM had considerable resources at its disposal, including the support of King Sobhuza and the power of the chiefs who were able to force their subjects to vote for the party. The INM also had the support of capitalist interests and was able to persuade the voters that the interests of the King and the survival of the nation were one and the same.

The INM’s victory was overwhelming and it won all eight seats that were available for election, gathering 85.47 percent of the vote.

King Sobhuza banned all political parties in Swaziland following the election of 1973 when his subjects dared to elect some members of parliament who were from opposition parties. That ban has been in force ever since.

The Times in its report says that the plotters are trying to recruit members of the public for the revival of the party ‘as soon as possible’ and several meetings were held last month (December 2010) with some people earmarked to be the ‘front of the party’.

The Times did not name the plotters, but promised more revelations to come.

I don’t know what more it has to tell us, but we should remember that however much democrats might want to see political parties in the kingdom this move to reform the INM is a diversion.

We don’t want ‘plotters’ for the king reforming political parties. As a first step toward democracy we want all political parties unbanned, a free media and freedom of association. That way we can start a proper debate on the way forward for Swaziland.