As more and more countries in the world recognise that Swaziland is not a democracy and that a small ruling elite is milking the majority of people, the kingdom has to go to extreme lengths to find friends in the international community.
Now news is emerging that Swazi Prime Minister Barnabas Dlamini has met with officials in Iran to establish economic ties.
The Iran news agency FARSreported that Dlamini met with Iran’s Foreign Ministry Deputy for African Affairs, Ali Bagheri. FARS said Swaziland was interested in establishing new ties with Iran in regard to building power plants and sanitary cooperation.
I don’t need to tell you how the international community views Iran at the moment (think ‘axis of evil’). It all goes to show how desperate Swaziland has become.
At last the Swazi High Court action to demonstrate that the Swaziland Elections and Boundaries Commission (EBC) is unconstitutional has started.
And if today’s newspaper accounts are anything to go by we can see that the defenders of the EBC are going to use misinformation to try to make their case.
One of the main matters in dispute is that the members appointed by King Mswati III to the EBC board are not qualified to do the job.
I hope that Swaziland’s journalists will see through the rhetoric and simply concentrate on the facts of the matter.
According to the Swazi Observer today (13 November 2008) the Swazi Attorney General Majahenkhaba Dlamini told the High Court that there was nothing wrong with the qualifications of the board members. The chair, Chief Gija Dlamini is variously described in public as an electrician or an electrical engineer.
The Observer reported that Majahenkhaba Dlamini said Section 90 (6) of the constitution does not require that a member of the EBC should have the qualification of a judge of a superior court.
‘Under that subsection members of the EBC could all have no qualification of a superior court judge,’ he said.
What the attorney general says is not strictly true. What S90 (6) says in full is as follows: The chairperson, deputy chairperson, and other members of the Commission shall possess the qualifications of a Judge of the superior courts or be persons of high moral character, proven integrity, relevant experience and demonstrable competence in the conduct of public affairs.’
The letter of the constitution is that the EBC chair needs to have the experience to do the job. The main experience is as a Judge of the superior courts or of ‘relevant experience’. The other stuff about high moral character, proven integrity and so on should be expected of someone with the experience of a Judge of the superior court.
Whatever you may think about Chief Gija Dlamini’s integrity and such like, the fact is that his experience as an electrician / electrical engineer does not equate with that of a Judge of the superior courts. If it did, then we would have electricians sitting on the bench in every court in Swaziland.
I noticed also that the attorney general tried to say that the Swaziland Coalition of Concerned Civic Organisations (SCCCO) could not sue in the High Court because it isn’t a legal body. Of course, we see this argument put forward a lot in Swaziland: any organisation that might be able to offer some expertise is banned from doing so.
In this case they are trying to exclude SCCCO, but in the past every (and I mean every) organisation in Swaziland was barred from contributing to the drafting of what became the Swaziland Constitution (and what the High Court is now asked to rule on).
The way the ruling elites in Swaziland cling to power is by marginalising all opposition. It believes if you only allow individuals to have a voice it is so much easier to silence them. That is why Swaziland’s ‘unique’ democracy has seen political parties banned since 1973 and why the attorney general tried to convince the High Court yesterday that SCCCO is a political party in disguise.
Sadistic school teachers lined up to whip 20 children at a Swaziland primary school.
Each Swazi child received 27 lashes from nine teachers who took it in turns to give each child three cuts.
The children’s crime? They had been watching two boys fighting.
The Times of Swaziland reported on Monday (10 November 2008) that pupils at a Phonjwane school were forced to undergo the beatings from the nine teachers who stood in a row to assault each child.
The newspaper reported, ‘When this newspaper visited the school, most pupils were heard screaming murder. They were talking about the matter in hushed tones.’
It added, ‘Some pupils were still bearing scars from the beating, even though they were fading.’
Quite rightly the newspaper points out that the teachers acted illegally. The law states that corporal punishment should be meted out by the Principal, or in his or her presence in the staff-room. It also states that a pupil should not be given more than three strokes.
I have written before about how the human rights of children are abused in Swaziland. Even the Swazi Constitution allows children to be beaten and sentences of lashings have been dished out by magistrates to juveniles.
Excessive whippings at Swazi schools happen all the time. In October,the Times reported that 35 pupils of Oslo High School were whipped after a cell phone rang during a lesson. On this occasion a group of teachers illegally beat each member of the class.
The Times reported in both cases parents that demanded answers from the school authorities. I am pleased that the parents were not prepared to put up with it. But they should know that the teachers have acted illegally and instead of going to school principals to complain they should head off to the nearest police station and have each and every one of those teachers charged with assault.
Is it any surprise that high court judges are excusing themselves from the case against Swaziland’s Elections and Boundaries Commission (EBC) that was supposed to start yesterday (11 November 2008)?
Put simply, the Swaziland Coalition of Concerned Civic Organisations (SCCCO) and others are saying that the EBC which ran the Swazi elections in September 2008 was formed unconstitutionally because its members were not appropriately qualified.
But there is a hidden agenda at play. King Mswati IIIappointed the members of the EBC and if the High Court sides with SCCCO it will in effect be saying that the king acted unconstitutionally. And in Swazi culture that would never be allowed to happen.
To a legal outsider like myself it seems an open and shut case. The constitution says that the EBC chair should be a judge and the king appointed Chief Gija Dlamini, who is variously described as an electrician or an electrical engineer. Whatever his real life job title is, he certainly isn’t a judge and therefore, not qualified.
Of course, the king ignores the constitution whenever it suits him. Only last month he appointed Barnabas Dlamini Prime Minister, even though the constitution states that the PM must be a member of the House of Assembly. Barnabas Dlamini wasn’t elected, indeed he didn’t even stand.
So are the judges running scared? So far two have excused themselves. Judge Jacobus Annandale excused himself because Chief Gila Dlamini is chief where the judge lives and (I suppose) he feels he can’t give unbiased opinion. Whether that means he is likely to be biased in favour or against the chief, I’ll leave for you to decide.
The Times of Swaziland reports today (12 November 2008) that another judge, Judge Mbutfo Mamba, has excused himself because he is friends with one of the applicants.
The search is now on to get a full bench of three judges, it remains to be seen who is brave enough to sit in judgement of the king.
Swazi gender activists are angry that King Mswati III and the newly elected Parliament have betrayed their hopes, and the Swaziland Constitution, by not appointing more women to the House of Assembly and the Senate.
In the September 2008 elections, just seven women were elected to the Assembly, which numbers 55 members (MPs).
The IPS news agency reported yesterday (10 November 2008) that Lomcebo Dlamini, national coordinator of the rights group Women in Law in Southern Africa-Swaziland (WLSA), said that the 2005 Constitution stipulates several measures to increase the number of women in parliament, but all hopes of getting at least a 30 percent representation (as the constitution requires) were quashed on 17 October 2008 when the king appointed only two women to the Assembly and seven to the Senate.
It seems to me that nobody should be surprised by this. By now we should all realise that the Swazi king and the ruling elite in Swaziland will only respect the parts of the constitution they choose to.
Generally, gender equity is ignored in Swaziland although it is enshrined in the constitution. On the political front last month King Mswati III appointed Barnabas Dlamini as Prime Minister even though the constitution states clearly that the PM must be a member of the House of Assembly. Barnabas Dlamini was not elected by anybody – indeed he never even stood for election.
IPS reported that the lack of women in parliament was ‘disappointing’.
Meketane Mazibuko, gender coordinator with the Lutheran Development Services, said, ‘It’s even worse when the head of state [King Mswati III] violates the country's Constitution just to deprive women a chance of fair representation in Parliament.’
IPS said WLSA’s Lomcebo Dlamini, was shocked that the king, who has said he is the constitution's number one defender, was not ashamed of violating the supreme law of the land and depriving women of their rights.
IPS said observers say that King Mswati, Africa’s last absolute monarch, was angry about a protest by women groups in August 2008 against the extravagant expenditures of the royal family.
Mazibuko also criticised the quality of MPs appointed by the King; most are princes, princesses and chiefs without the skills to be legislators.
The new cabinet also fails the scorecard on gender equality. Out of 18 cabinet ministers, only five are women.
Taking a cue from King Mswati III, the Assembly has ignored the constitutional requirement to elect one woman from each of the four administrative regions.
