Even the Swazi Observer, the newspaper in effect owned by King Mswati III, sub-Saharan Africa's last absolute monarch, is enraged by the Swazi government’s latest attempt to muzzle the media.
Cabinet has approved a Media Commission Bill that the newspaper says, ‘seeks to regulate or even censor media practitioners if found to have criticised some operations of the state’.
Three cheers for the Observer in voicing its concern, but it is not alone.
The Media Institute of Southern Africa – Swaziland Chapter (MISA)director Comfort Mabuza called the Ministry of Information, Communication and Technology, ‘double-faced’ because it had not been honest in negotiations with media houses. The government had said negotiations were continuing even though the Cabinet was set to discuss the final Bill.
Mabuza said the new Media Commission Bill was similar to oppressive laws of the former apartheid regime in South Africa, ‘where publications were closed at whim and such would draw the eyes of the international community to the country unnecessarily’.
The Secretary of the Swaziland Editors' Forum Jabu Matsebula also expressed his dismay over the move.
‘This is nothing but censorship. That journalists must have licences before they could practice is a flagrant disrespect of democratic norms. If they give you the licence, what can stop them from revoking it if you criticise certain actions of the status quo?’ he said.
When Barnabas Dlamini, Swaziland’s illegally-appointed Prime Minister, told journalists they had nothing to fear from him he was not telling the truth.
Dlamini, was previously PM in 1997 to 2003 and during that time he was famed for his disregard for the rule of law and his attack on freedom of speech.
Dlamini attacked the media and two publications were closed down for reporting things he did not like.
This week comes newsthat the Swazi Government intends to press forward with plans for state-imposed regulation of the media in Swaziland. This could mean that the government would be able to decide whether journalists are doing their jobs properly. It could lead to sanctions against media houses which violate the government’s rules. There are even suggestions that journalists would have to be registered by the government: put simply that means that the government decides who can and who cannot work as a journalist.
At present in Swaziland most of the media is state controlled. Workers, including journalists, at Swazi TVand SBIS radio are civil servants. The only other radio station Voice of the Church is a Christian station and doesn’t deal with news and current affairs. The only ‘independent’ television station, Channel S,is owned by a former ‘praise singer’ of King Mswati III, sub-Saharan Africa’s last absolute monarch. Channel S is not seen as being independent from the state.
There are two newspaper groups, the Swazi Observer is in effect owned by King Mswati and the Times of Swaziland is the only independent media house in Swaziland, but when the going gets tough it bends to the will of King Mswati.
The Media Institute of Southern Africa (MISA) Swaziland said in a statement it was opposed to government regulation. ‘We’re totally against government’s pronouncement on the issue of Media Complaints Commission (MCC),’ said Comfort Mabuza, MISA Swaziland National Director.
MISA believes the media should be allowed to regulate itself.
Barnbas Dlamini, Swaziland’s illegally-appointed Prime Minister, has been telling Swazi editors that he is not a minister.
That’s ‘minister’ as in political leader, not ‘minister’ as in man of the church.
Dlamini went to great length to make his case when he met Swazi media editors at their regular monthly editors’ forum this week.
I’m not too sure why he felt the need to say this, but according to a report in today’s Weekend Observer he quoted the Swazi Constitution section and sub section.
This exercised Weekend Observer editor Alec Lushaba so much he wrote at great length in his newspaper today (7 March 2009) to point out that Dlamini is indeed a minister.
Good for Lushaba, but he and Barnabas Dlamini missed a vital point.
Barnabas Dlamini is not a legitimate Prime Minister. Section 67 (i) of the constitution says ‘The King shall appoint the Prime Minister from among members of the House [of Assembly] acting upon the recommendation of the King’s Advisory Council.’
Barnabas Dlamini was not a member of the House of Assembly. He was elected by nobody. He was appointed to the House only so he could be Prime Minister.
In Swaziland members of the ruling elite can tell as many lies as they like, but people in the international community are having none of it.
The latest example of this comes after Swaziland’s illegally-appointed Prime Minister Barnabas Dlamini told Swazi journalists attending the recent editors’ forum they had nothing to fear from him and they will enjoy media freedom while he is PM.
Don’t worry he told them, in the event something untoward happens to any of them, journalists can always seek redress in court.
I wasn’t at the meeting so I don’t know if those present laughed out loud at this or if they just recoiled in horror. Last time Dlamini was Prime Minister he caused internal and international outrage when he decided to ignore court rulings and the entire Appeal Court resigned in protest.
Newswatch, a group based in India that monitors media freedom across the world, picked up on Dlamini comments and published this report. Newswatch saw through Dlamini: this is what it wrote.
Newly Swaziland PM Sibusiso Dlamini assures media houses they will enjoy press freedom
Date: February 9, 2009 Author: Newswatch Desk
Swaziland’s Prime Minister, [Barnabas] Sibusiso Dlamini, notorious for harassing and closing down media houses during his previous term as prime minister between 1993 and 2003, has assured journalists that they will enjoy media freedom during his new term. Dlamini was recently re-appointed by [King Mswati III].
Speaking to editors during a breakfast meeting on January 29, 2009, Dlamini said the media shouldn't be afraid of him because the constitution protects them. He said in the event something untoward happens to any of them, journalists can always seek redress in court.
The prime minister was reacting to concerns from one of the editors about Dlamini's leadership style, recalling his previous tenure. Times of Swaziland managing editor, Martin Dlamini, had said the media had been uneasy since Sibusiso Dlamini's re-appointment because they did not know what he had in store for them this time.
He said these fears were compounded by recent events when Times columnist Mfomfo Nkhambule was harassed by state police and traditional authorities for expressing himself.
In response, the prime minister assured the journalists that he would not harass them this time and they will enjoy their freedoms. Referring to the Nkhambule case, the prime minister stated that it is the government's duty to protect the king from criticism, which is why the columnist was questioned by the police about his views.
But in the same breath, the prime minister banned the media from writing about political parties which the government does not recognise. These parties include the Peoples United Democratic Movement (PUDEMO) whose leader, Mario Masuku, is currently in jail for allegedly supporting terrorism.
During the Prime Minister's previous term, he not only harassed the media, but also demonstrated total disregard for the rule of law resulting in the complete collapse of the judiciary. This saw the en masse resignation of the Appeals Court judges who only came back after Prime Minister Dlamini was fired and a new prime minister was appointed.
During his previous term, Dlamini also banned two media houses, the Nation Magazine and the Guardian newspaper. While the Nation fought its way back to life in court, the Guardian remains banned even today.
The popular view in Swaziland is that Dlamini was reappointed for his tough-handedness and has a strict mandate to specifically deal with perceived state enemies.
Swaziland’s illegally-appointed Prime Minister Barnabas Dlamini met editors and senior journalists last week at what is promised to be a regular monthly ‘editors’ forum’ meeting.
The forum is billed as an opportunity for journalists to question the Prime Minister (and any other senior politicians he chooses to invite along). To some people this ‘openness’ demonstrates how much he believes in freedom of speech and freedom of the media.
The forum is not a new idea; the most recent Prime Minister Themba Dlamini also held such meetings. There was some doubt about whether Barnabas Dlamini would carry on with the ‘tradition’ because he has a well-deserved reputation as a hater of freedoms, including freedom of the press and freedom of association. Since he came to power in October 2008, Barnabas Dlamini has branded four political formations as terrorists and announced that anyone who is a member or supporter of the organisations will be deemed a terrorist. Under the Suppression of Terrorism Act,this could result in up to 25 years in jail.
I suppose Barnabas had nothing to worry about meeting the journalists. At his final editors’ forum meeting in July 2008, Themba Dlamini praised the editorsfor all the support they had given him and his government over the previous five years.
The forum is billed as an opportunity for the media to question the Prime Minister and his Cabinet colleagues on matters of interest to the nation, but in his speech the PM was very open about the fact that he would only answer the questions that he wanted to.
He told the editors, ‘You will recall that the initial breakfast meetings were very difficult and tense even though I had given you the rules of engagement.
‘I think you will remember rule number one, which says, “I am not under any obligation to answer all your questions and I reserve the right to refuse to answer any question” This has been the rule of thumb for our breakfast meetings and I am happy that we have kept it alive throughout our sessions; and our interaction has matured over time.’
This, of course, doesn’t represent an open dialogue. A real interaction would only take place when the Prime Minister and senior politicians were forced to answer questions they did NOT want to answer.
In view of the recent controversy surrounding Mfomfo Nkhambule, who was threatened with jail for the articles he has written in the Times of Swaziland, it is instructive to note that in his speech Themba Dlamini told editors, I’ am glad that in Swaziland people have constitutional rights to express themselves freely I am also happy that there is no one that has been reprimanded because of expressing himself or herself through the media or any other medium.’
Following Barnabas Dlamini’s first editors’ forum, the civil society group Swaziland Coalition of Concerned Civic Organisations (SCCCO) wrote a media release critiquing the Prime Minister’s contribution.
It covered the PM’s views on the Swaziland Constitution, the controversial constitutional commitment to free primary school education, the attempts at influencing the press and the diplomatic corps, the government’s disregard for ‘International Human Rights Norms’ and the use of performance incentives for cabinet ministers.
The release did not get widespread coverage, so I have posted it on the blog here.
