Swaziland Coalition of Concerned Civic Organisations.
Today’s long awaited court hearing on the legality of the Elections and Boundaries Commission was further delayed due to the last minute recusal of Justice Annadale due to the fact that the Chairman of the Elections and Boundaries Commission Chief Gija is the judge’s chief.
While we respect the right of the judge to maintain his integrity, independence and the appearance of independence we are dismayed at the late notice.
The Coalition was aware that he was to be one of the judges for over a month and are disappointed that he only realised this potential conflict of interest now. His last minute recusal is now causing difficulties in forming a proper judicial panel. This morning, with the Coalition’s legal team in place and costs mounting we were told that his replacement Justice Mamba has also recused himself.
Musa Hlophe, the Co-ordinator of the Coalition said ‘We sincerely hope that the Chief Justice makes every effort to find an appropriate judge so that this important case can be heard before a full panel this week.’
Swazi Civic Society Seeks Elections Commission Declared Unconstitutional.
The High Court of Swaziland will today (11 November 2008) hear one of the most important cases to come before it under the new constitution. The Swaziland Coalition of Concerned Civic Organisations has challenged the appointments of all five of the Elections and Boundaries Commission as being unconstitutional.
Musa Hlophe, the Coalition’s Co-ordinator said ‘the Constitution asks for an independent commission lead by people who are either capable of being high court judges or have relevant experience and demonstrable competence. This commission is staffed by people whose suitability for their posts is measured by loyalty to the ruling class not their independence from it.’ He goes on to say that at the heart of this year’s crises in Zimbabwe and Kenya were discredited Elections Commissions that were appointed through cronyism and were therefore unable to stand up to political pressures.
To Hlophe the facts of the case are clear. ‘The Commission’s Chair – Chief Gija Dlamini is a fine, upstanding Swazi who has shown nothing but loyalty to the King and the Traditional Authorities. This is exactly why he is perfectly unsuited to be the chair of an independent body. His professional career is that of an electrical engineer in the Swaziland Water Services Commission and there is nothing in his past that that shows the necessary experience and competence to run the extremely difficult and technically complex area of elections administration.’ He goes on to say that the rest of the Commission are no different in that their independence is compromised in terms of their previous positions, their connections and relationships to the powerful. They are also disqualified by their lack of experience and relevant competence. Nowhere in the histories of any of the Commissioners can we see any attributes that meet the clearly put demands of the constitution.
This case has significant repercussions for the status of the Constitution in Swaziland. The government’s defence is that it was a decision by His Majesty, King Mswati III and so is beyond the competence of the courts to question it. This year His Majesty did not meet his obligations under the constitution to make at least 40% of his appointments to parliament women. The government continually ignores the Bill of Rights by harassing and arresting union members and protesters and on occasions beating and killing them. The Coalition believes that the assertions of the Attorney General last year and Chairman of the one of the powerful traditional bodies Prince Mangaliso this year that traditionalists need not worry because the constitution has changed nothing may in fact be the case. This places Swaziland right back to 1973 when King Sobuza II suspended the post colonial constitution and assumed all political power to himself. In fact this interpretation of the constitution places the people of Swaziland back to a pre Magna CartaBritain.
Hlophe concludes ‘If that is the case then the constitution is window dressing set up to fool the international community. We urge the judges to strike a blow for judicial and formal independence and recognisable constitutionalism in Swaziland’
Swaziland’s only independent daily newspaper has come out strongly against a move to reintroduce detention without trial in Swaziland.
As I reported yesterday, the Liqoqo committee, which advises King Mswati III, is considering reviving an order that would allow people to be detained for up to 60 days by police without trial.
The Times of Swaziland in an editorial comment published today(10 November 2008) says the news should be shocking but in light of the recent declaration of war against his subjects made by King Mswati III, it is not. The king had publicly told Dlamini to fight the terrorists and all who support them.
As readers of this blog will know, the king last month illegally appointed Barnabas Dlamini as Swaziland’s Prime Minister. When he was previously Prime Minister from 1996 to 2003, Dlamini introduced the 60 Day Detention Order. He also unleashed a reign of terror against the Swazi people and had complete disregard for the rule of law.
The Times says, ‘Only a ruling party desperate to cling onto power’ would think detention without trial was a way to fight terrorism.
‘Slowly this country is degenerating into a military state and we should not and cannot allow ‘that to happen.
‘Using Saddam Hussein strategies of holding onto power would only yield the result that saw the former Iraq leader toppled unceremoniously by external forces.
‘Liqoqo should, therefore, not begin to enforce dictatorship when the world seeks to destroy it.
‘Every citizen has a right to a fair hearing and this right is protected by the country’s constitution; not that this country’s constitution is followed to the letter.
‘We are all concerned about terrorism and it deserves to be condemned in the strongest possible terms, but whatever measures are put in place, they should not be haphazard and unlawful.
‘The king should dismiss the Liqoqo proposal if they eventually decide to submit it to him for approval.
‘May we also use this opportunity to request Liqoqo to think away from reviving the 1973 Decree as Option B.
‘The simple and most effective anti-terrorism action is good governance, where the equal distribution of the country’s wealth, political transparency and accountability to the people, dialogue and power sharing are an important ingredient.
‘Only then can we realise peace and prosperity. Any other way will simply render us a “banana republic”’.
Swazi soldiers have taken it upon themselves to become guardians of law and order in Swaziland.
They have been trying to stamp pout prostitution in Manzini, Swaziland’s second city.
Despite the fact that soldiers are among prostitutes’ best clients, a group of armed soldiers have been harassing ‘working girls’ on the streets.
In one case six sex workers were rounded up and physically and sexually abused by soldiers. One of their male clients was forced to perform a degrading sex act for the amusement of the soldiers.
An official army spokesman refused to comment on whether the action of the soldiers was a legitimate use of the military.
The Times Sunday reported yesterday(9 November 2008) that three prostitutes had gone to a regular spot on the Manzini streets excepting trade one night when an army car parked near them.
One of the women takes up the story, ‘Some of the girls we found there took off when the car pulled up. One soldier ordered all three of us to jump into the back of the car. He emphasised that we should bring condoms.’
The Times Sunday reported, ‘The three ladies were under the impression that the soldiers were just being aggressive, which is a characteristic of their job. They actually thought they would be taken to a private spot or their (soldiers) quarters to carry out business.
‘However, that was not to be so.’
The soldiers drove the women to a popular pub where they demanded that they identify other commercial sex workers, which they did. The soldiers then drove six of the prostitutes to Trelawny Park. Along the way they picked up one of their regular male clients.
At the park the soldiers ordered them all out of the car where they kicked and abused the women. The soldiers said the women were ‘paying for selling our bodies to willing customers’.
The women were then ordered to lower their pants and demonstrate to the soldiers how they entertain men. The man was forced to dig a hole and the soldiers ‘ordered him to insert his manhood, and pretend he was with a woman’.
The soldiers then beat the women with sticks and shrubs.
When questioned by the Times Sunday, Army spokesman Major Dumsani Masuku said ‘he did not have enough time to consult’.
However, the newspaper reported, some soldiers have been deployed to public facilities that in Swaziland that are considered susceptible to terrorist attacks. Masuku was non-committal with regards to their role in other crimes such as prostitution, and the appropriate course of action in the event they come across other forms of crime.
It is hard to see what the Army spokesperson’s problem is here. Clearly, it is not the job of the Army to ‘police’ the streets of Swaziland. The soldiers were acting illegally and should themselves be subjected to the law. We could start with charging them with abduction and sexual assault.
Meanwhile, we need a clear statement from Swaziland’s Prime Minister Barnabas Dlaminithat the Army has no place in policing Swaziland. The Army’s job is to protect Swaziland against external enemies. Soldiers should not be unleashed on the general public to ‘clean up the streets’.
I doubt that such a statement will be forthcoming from Dlamini. He is himself an illegally-appointed Prime Minister and the last time he was in office from 1996 to 2003, he unleashed a reign of terror against the Swazi people and showed a complete disregard for the rule of law in Swaziland.
Only weeks after the illegal appointment of Barnabas Dlamini as Prime Minister, Swaziland may reintroduce an act that allows police to detain suspects for up to 60 days without them appearing before a magistrate.
The law had applied previously when Dlamini was Swazi premier between 1996 and 2003. His term in office then was characterised by a reign of terror unleashed against the Swazi people and a complete disregard for the rule of law by Dlamini.
Today (9 November 2008) comes news that the Liqoqo committee that advises King Mswati III on important matters has summonsed the Swaziland Attorney General Majahen-khaba Dlamini to brief it on the possibility of reviving the 60-Day Detention Without Trial Order.
The Times Sunday reports todaythat the move comes following increased tension in Swaziland after the discovery of bombs in the kingdom. One exploded inside a car, killing those who were alleged to be on a mission to plant it under the main bridge at Lozitha, near one of the many palaces of the Swazi Royal Family.
The Attorney General confirmed to the newspaper that he met with Liqoqo, but he would not say what he told the committee.
Earlier this year, the Swazi Parliament introduced anti-terrorism legislation designed to give the state more power against those opposed to the undemocratic regime in Swaziland.
According to the Times Sunday, a source said that members of Liqoqo did not think the powers it had were strong enough.
Chairman of the Liqoqo Prince Logcogco said the committee was acting under the instructions of the king to get tough on terrorists.
Last month, while announcing Dlamini as Prime Minister, the king publicly told Dlamini to get the terrorists and all who support them.
This has been widely interpreted as permission for Dlamini to unleash another reign of terror in Swaziland.
Already civil liberties have been curtailed. Earlier, I reported that a perfectly legal march had been halted by the police, who picked up march leaders and transported them to various parts of Swaziland to stop them from protesting.
