Commentary
Swaziland has asked other
countries to send it money to help pay for upcoming national elections. It is a
request that must be refused. The elections are widely recognised to be bogus.
The kingdom is ruled by
King Mswati III as the last absolute monarch in sub-Saharan Africa. Political
parties are banned from taking part in elections and the King chooses the Prime
Minister and the Cabinet. The PM is always a Dlamini; the King’s
clan.
Elections are held every
five years in Swaziland. People only get to select 55 of 65 members of the
House of Assembly. The King chooses the other 10. No members of the Swazi
Senate are elected by the people; the King chooses 20 and the other 10 are
elected by members of the House of Assembly.
After the last election in
2013, King Mswati appointed nine princes and princesses to the House
of Assembly and the Senate.
King Mswati also appointed four chiefs and one acting
chief. In Swaziland chiefs are the personal representatives of the King in
their local areas. They are seen as the eyes and ears of the king and often
delegate his powers to themselves.
He also appointed
another 16 members of his Royal Family to top political
jobs; effectively carving up public life in the kingdom in his favour.
The next election is due later in 2018 at a date yet
to be set by the King; the present parliament ends in October.
Swaziland’s Elections and
Boundaries Commission Chair Chief Gija Dlamini (a half-brother of the King) said
he welcomed financial assistance from abroad. The Swazi Observer, a newspaper in effect owned by the King, on
Thursday (26 April 2018) reported him saying, ‘Even prominent countries like
the United States of America seek financial assistance from other countries at
times so we wouldn’t close the door on donor aid towards the elections, but
would gladly appreciate assistance,’ he said.
Democracies would serve the
people of Swaziland better by rebuffing calls for assistance. They should also
decline invitations to monitor the election for fairness. Instead, they should
clearly state that the election cannot be considered free and fair under the
present political set-up.
There are precedents for
this. In
2008 the European Union (EU) Ambassador to Swaziland Peter Beck Christiansen
said the EU would
not be ‘observing’ the election. He was reported by the Times
of Swaziland saying there were ‘shortcomings in the kingdom’s democracy’.
He highlighted that the Prime Minister and Cabinet were not elected by
Parliament.
In 2003, the Commonwealth
Expert Group declined an invitation to observe the election. In
a letter it stated, ‘We do not regard the credibility of these National
elections as an issue: no elections can be credible when they are for a
Parliament which does not have power and when political parties are banned.’
Indeed, the parliament has no power. The Prime
Minister is merely a placeman for the King. This is no secret. The present
Prime Minister Barnabas
Dlamini is on record saying the government belonged to the King.
The Times
Sunday also reported him saying, ‘Government
listens when His Majesty speaks and we will always implement the wishes of the
King and the Queen mother.’
Many organisations have called for Swaziland’s
constitution to be rewritten to make the kingdom more democratic.
In November 2008 the Commonwealth
Expert Team, which had monitored the election that
year called for a
review of the constitution because the elections were not
credible since political parties were banned in Swaziland.
After the most recent national election in 2013, the
African Union (AU) mission called for fundamental changes in the kingdom to
ensure people had freedom of speech and of assembly. The AU said the Swaziland
Constitution guaranteed ‘fundamental rights and freedoms including the rights
to freedom of association’, but in practice ‘rights with regard to political
assembly and association are not fully enjoyed’. The AU said this was because
political parties were not allowed to contest elections.
The AU urged Swaziland to review the constitution,
especially in the areas of ‘freedoms of conscience, expression, peaceful
assembly, association and movement as well as international principles for free
and fair elections and participation in electoral process’.
In its report
on the 2013 elections, the Commonwealth observers recommended
that measures be put in place to ensure separation of powers between the
government, parliament and the courts so that Swaziland was in line with its
international commitments.
They also called on the Swaziland Constitution to be
‘revisited’.
The report stated, ‘This should ideally be carried out
through a fully inclusive, consultative process with all Swazi political
organisations and civil society (needed, with the help of constitutional
experts), to harmonise those provisions which are in conflict. The aim is to
ensure that Swaziland’s commitment to political pluralism is unequivocal.’
It also recommended that a law be passed to allow for
political parties to take part in elections, ‘so as to give full effect to the letter
and spirit of Section 25 of the Constitution, and in accordance with
Swaziland’s commitment to its regional and international commitments’.
In 2015, following a visit to Swaziland, a Commonwealth
mission renewed its call for the constitution to be reviewed
so the kingdom could move toward democracy.
Richard
Rooney
See also
DAY
DEMOCRACY DIED IN SWAZILAND
KING
IN TOTAL CONTROL OF HIS KINGDOM
IN
PRAISE OF POLITICAL PARTIES
No comments:
Post a Comment