The Swazi Government is about to hammer another nail in the coffin of democracy in Swaziland.
If a law currently being drafted is passed, civil servants (that’s anyone on the government payroll, including school teachers) will face jail if they engage in politics.
He falsely claimed that the Swaziland Constitution allows him to do this.
This week, Public Service Minister Mtiti Fakudze said the legislation was currently at drafting stage and it will be debated by cabinet before the end of this month (June 2009).
In March, the Times of Swaziland, the kingdom’s only independent daily newspaper, in an editorial comment, said the Suppression of Terrorism Act had become the supreme law in Swaziland over-riding the kingdom’s constitution.
It called for a Human Rights Commission to be formed to protect the constitution and criticised members of parliament who are failing to bring cabinet ministers to account.
The People’s United Democratic Movement (PUDEMO), one of the political parties banned in Swaziland and branded a terrorist organisation by Dlamini, said that the Swazi Government has already identified targets ‘and the Intelligence Branch will be used to hunt down and identify more targets’. The statement said members and supporters of PUDEMO were prime targets in the clampdown.
Swaziland’s illegally-appointed Prime Minister Barnabas Dlamini has falsely claimed that the Swazi Constitution allows him to unleash a witch-hunt against civil servants who support freedom and democracy.
Dlamini has been widely criticisedfor announcing this week that civil servants who engage in politics that do not support the government will be sacked from their jobs.
Now, in an attempt to justify his actions, Dlamini has claimed that he has the Swaziland Constitution on his side.
In a statement Dlamini said, banning civil servants from engaging in politics did not conflict with the constitution and he cited Section 25 (iii) (c) in his defence.
But S25 (iii) (c) actually reads as follows, ‘Nothing contained in or done under the authority of any law shall be held to be inconsistent with or in contravention of this section to the extent that the law in question makes provision (c) that imposes reasonable restrictions upon public officers, except so far as that provision or, as the case may be, the thing done under the authority of the law is shown not to be reasonably justifiably in a democratic society.’
It’s a bit long-winded, but what it is saying is that in some circumstances restrictions can on ‘public officers’ but NOT if the restrictions are unreasonable in a democratic society.
Not allowing civil servants to participate in politics is not ‘reasonable’ in a democratic society.
No democracy that I know of forbids ‘public officers’ to participate in politics. Let’s remember that the PM is attacking civil servants (including ordinary police officers) most of whom have pretty mundane jobs pushing paper around. There is even talk that school teachers would be restricted under Swaziland’s new rule.
If all ‘public officers’ were counted there would hardly be an employed person in Swaziland who would be allowed to speak up.
His latest statement on the constitution says two things to me. Either he is deliberately misleading the Swazi people by citing S25 (iii) (c) in his defence of the political purge, in which case he is simply a lying politician; or he just doesn’t understand the constitution.
Barnabas Dlamini, the illegally-appointed Prime Minister of Swaziland, has announced the Swazi police have been instructed to find out how a former journalist who was critical of the government is now a police officer.
Dlamini told the Swazi House of Assembly that this put in question the effectiveness of the police’s ‘vetting’ procedure when recruiting.
According to the Swazi Observer, the newspaper in effect owned by King Mswati III, Dlamini was responding to questions from members of parliament. They wanted to know why a critic of the government was allowed to join the police force.
Dlamini told the House, ‘though we may not claim that the vetting exercise is 100 percent foolproof, I wish to assure the Committee that the intelligence Service does all in line with its specialty and capacity, to ensure that undesirable elements are not recruited into the police service. However, the issue will be looked into to determine if all processes were followed.’
Dlamini announced on Monday (9 March 2009) that his government (which is unconstitutionally constructed) is drafting a charter that will compel civil servants who are considered by the Swaziland ruling elite to be ‘political’ would be given the chance to recant and if they didn’t they would be sacked from their jobs.
This is the latest move by Dlamini to silence dissent in Swaziland, which has the last absolute monarchy in sub-Saharan Africa. Last year he introduced the Suppression of Terrorism Act, which is widely seen as a law to curb freedom of speech and association. He has also branded four political entities as ‘terrorists’and members and supporters can face up to 25 years in jail.
Protests against the political purging have already begun in Swaziland, led by trade unions, banned political parties and the kingdom’s only independent daily newspaper, the Times of Swaziland.
Opposition is growing after the announcement from Barnabas Dlamini, Swaziland’s illegally-appointed Prime Minister that he and his unconstitutionally-formed government are to start a witch-hunt against civil servants who speak out in favour of democracy.
Dlamini told the Swazi House of Assembly that civil servants who are considered by the Swaziland ruling elite to be ‘political’ would be given the chance to recant and if they didn’t they would be sacked from their jobs.
Dlamini, who has a long history of disregarding the rule of law in Swaziland, gave no details of how ‘political’ civil servants would be identified and what processes would be put in place to determine guilt or innocence.
But Dlamini’s move is not supposed to be rational, or even legal: he just wants to silence any and all opposition.
The Secretary General of the Swaziland Federation of Trade Unions Jan Sithhole accused Dlamini of violating the Swazi constitution and the rule of law.
He said, ‘What is very concerning is that protection of the constitution should be one of the core business of parliament and the office of the Prime Minister as head of government.
He added, Section 25 (i) of the constitution allows for freedom of assembly and association. Sithole also pointed out the inconsistencies of the Swazi Government which has signed international conventions on human rights.
The People’s United Democratic Movement (PUDEMO), a political entity branded ‘terrorists’ by Barnabas Dlamini last yearsaid in a statement that the Swazi Government has already identified targets ‘and the Intelligence Branch will be used to hunt down and identify more targets’. The statement said members and supporters of PUDEMO were prime targets in the clampdown.
PUDEMO said, ‘The offensive will not only end in the public sector, but will be extended to the private sector, especially because the king and government hold shares in many of the leading companies and parastatals.
‘Comrades will now be rendered unemployable in the country. Job opportunities will now be reserved as a reward for the passive and those who are pro-status quo. Employers will be forced to either toe the line or lose business.’
The Times of Swaziland, the kingdom’s only independent daily newspaper, in an editorial comment today (11 March 2009), said the Suppression of Terrorism Act had become the supreme law in Swaziland over-riding the kingdom’s constitution.
It called for a Human Rights Commission to be formed to protect the constitution and criticised members of parliament who are failing to bring cabinet ministers to account.
‘Meanwhile, government will stop at nothing to trample on every right that it sees as posing a threat to its existence,’ the newspaper said.
Some areas of civil society see the government’s new repressive dictate as a move towards dictatorship.
Vusi Sibi, a political columnist in the Times, remains optimistic that democrats will eventually win through.
He wrote today, ‘In fact what the government is plotting is not different to the bloody purges dictatorships across the globe routinely unleashed to whip the people into conformity. But as history has taught us, such unbridled abuse of political power did not permanently enthrone these dictatorships as legitimate governing regimes.
‘A good majority of these dictatorships eventually collapsed from the unstoppable overbearing weight of democratic winds of change.’
Swaziland’s illegally-appointed Prime Minister Barnabas Dlamini has threatened to sack Swazi civil servants who campaign for democracy.
He announced yesterday (9 March 2009) that his unconstitutionally-constructed government is drafting a charter that will compel civil servants who are members of political parties to either renounce their membership or resign from the civil service.
‘If they refuse to resign from these organisations, they will be pushed out,’ Dlamini told Swaziland’s House of Assembly.
The move is another attempt by Swaziland’s ruling elite to stifle political dissent in the kingdom. Last November, Dlamini branded four political entities as ‘terrorist’ organisations and now members and supporters face up to 25 years in jail.
Mario Masuku, President of the People’s United Democratic Movement (PUDEMO), one of the branded entities, has been in jail since November awaiting trial on a charge under the Suppression of Terrorism Act.
Leaders of the Swaziland Youth Congress (SWAYOCO) have been harassed by police and a rally at the end of February intended in support of Masuku was smashed by police.
In the latest development, Dlamini said his government was aware that some civil servants were ‘fighting the system’.
The Times of Swaziland, the kingdom’s only independent daily newspaper, today (10 March 2009)reports Dlamini saying, ‘This should not happen. In the Commonwealth (former British colonies) countries, civil servants are not supposed to publicly declare their alignment with political parties. It is even worse, especially here in Swaziland where these civil servants even occupy prominent positions in these organisations.’
The Prime Minister was responding to a question from MP Patrick Gamedze who asked why civil servants with anti-government political views were kept in the civil service and why Swaziland’s Intelligence Branch allowed it to happen unchecked.
The Times reported Dlamini saying his government was drafting a charter and also amending the General Orders to prevent this from happening. He advised those civil servants involved to resign from the civil service if they wanted to be politicians.
The newspaper said it was then that he stated that they would be given a chance to put their houses in order failing which they would be ‘pushed out’.
The Swazi Observer, the newspaper in effect owned by King Mswati III, reported that MPs were ‘thrown into rapturous laughter’ when the PM made his threat.
The newspaper reported that it is ‘public knowledge’ that many civil servants, including school teachers were critical of the government.
