PUDEMO replies to Qalakaliboli

21 May 2006


A Right to reply – Qalakaliboli Dlamini’s letter to the editor dated Friday May 19, 2006 entitled “View about the recent blockade at our borders".


I have been a member of PUDEMO since its inception in 1983. I am a proud founding member of this giant political movement. I have served in various structures, from branches to regions and the General council. I will be completing a second term as PUDEMO Secretary General in October this year. All these years I have not found it important to reply to people who write letters to the editor. This is not because there is anything wrong in writing a letter to the editor. My misgivings are that most of these people use pseudonym and they normally hide their true identities. They are cowards. They are jealous of other people’s achievements. How then do you engage a ghost, I ask myself? If someone is man enough to stand up for what he believes in, why hide himself. I have never hidden my identity when it comes to issues I believe in. I have always detested the way we are governed, and since 1983 I have stood out to be seen and heard. The second reason is that you make the “ghost” to feel like he is a living being, he is breathing the same air we breath. I believe you just stoop low to his level and make him feel important. And that is dangerous and unwarranted. We must allow the dead to be amongst the dead.

Qalakaliboli – what is in a name?

This Qalakaliboli, God forgives me, the name speaks for itself. From the name QALAKALIBOLI, you can deduce that he was a mistake from day one. It could be that he is some sort of a case that is still to be concluded. I do not want to speculate what kind of case he is, but may be he was born in a wrong homestead, you know what I mean, may be “tahlangana emahlangeni.” I pray that his or her case be concluded before he or she passes on. Someone is not happy about his being hence liqala solo aliboli.

I have called a lot of the youth league members who were at the university during the time SWAYOCO was founded, and no one seemed to remember this fellow. Until he unmask himself or herself, I may safely say he is not telling the truth when he said he was once a member of this movement.

For the purposes of this writing let me say the author of the letter is a male ghost and hence I will use he when referring to him.

The issues raised

COSATU is not our crony (derogatory term for close friend or companion)

COSATU is, but a true ally in the liberation struggle for a free society. Our relationship with the tripartite alliance goes back to the struggle years. Whilst the Swazi Royal family was playing political prostitute with the Boers, trading on fellow African brothers and sisters (MK cadres) who were fighting for the freedom of the African people in Southern Africa, PUDEMO was either directly fighting on the side of the ANC or aiding it with logistical support. I am proud to state that I was honoured to have worked within the underground structures of the ANC. I put my life and those closer to me at risk for the liberation of South Africa. In short I was a true and full member of the MK.

COSATU is never begged to support the Swazi struggle.

Whenever we meet our true internationalists in South Africa we do not have to remind them to support our struggle. They know of our life long commitment to continue with the struggle until we are all free. I hope this is clear to all and sundry, COSATU will continue to do the noble thing and support the struggling masses of our country. They have been housing PUDEMO in their offices and accommodating our comrades in RSA. It is through their international support that we have managed to isolate the Royal family from the international community.

The blockade and its effect.

The reason that you are moaning about the blockade, it shows that is was very effective. We are encouraged about such feedback and thanks to you Qalakaliboli we will have another one soon. If only we knew you I was going to personally thank you. Every organization needs people like you to tell it how well they have sold their product. This border blockade product was well received by our customers, people like you.

Swazi Business and the struggle.

We must thank those businesspeople that have supported us all these years. They have paid for our offices, and made it a point that we attend conferences and meetings near and far. For that we thank them. To them we say it was unfortunate that the political repression in the country made us take the decision that we took, and in the process their business suffered. It was the case in RSA when there was economic boycott. Innocent businesses became casualties. Unfortunately that is the nature of the struggle anywhere in the world. All that we need to do is for all of us to work together and resolve the issues that affect Swaziland so that these things do not happen. It took brave businessmen in RSA to talk to the ANC in Zambia that a new political dispensation was ushered in. We call for true businesses to actively engage all parties for a genuine political dialogue so that we can all contribute in making Swaziland a country that we can be proud of.

I find it difficult that you Qalakaliboli are a true businessman. May be you are, so many ghost businessmen have mushroomed in recent months. These are the ones that looted E50 million of our taxpayer’s money over eight weeks. The way you talk, I am most inclined to believe that you may be one of them. Remember, most of them were ghost companies like you are. But do not forget that Liqala kaliboli. All the thieves will have to account one day.

A former card carrying member of SWAYOCO

I have adequately covered that in my opening paragraph. If indeed you happened to be a former member, I am sure you are one of those we dismissed because they were working for the state. Like all organizations fighting for freedom, there are those members who find the road to freedom too long, taxing, difficult and very dangerous for them to continue that they decide to turn around and become sellouts. These are always weeded out whenever they are discovered. We still have those at PUDEMO, and we will have them until victory is achieved. To me you fit this description if indeed you were once a member. True members do not leave an organization just because it has taken a few decisions that they are not happy with. The withdrawal of Comrade Mario Masuku from the Royal constitutional Review Commission was a democratic and popular decision. A lot of people, inside and outside the country agree with PUDEMO that that decision was correct. You must remember, all the principled members who were appointed to such shameful commissions resigned. It was not only Comrade Mario alone. Mandla Hlatjwako, Nkozo Hlatjwako, Doctor Jerry Gule, Muhawu Maziya and if I am not mistaken, Zombodze Magagula left these commissions at some point in time.

Why Comrade President Mario Masuku was withdrawn.

The reasons for withdrawing Comrade Mario were put forward. These included the manner in which he was appointed, which was not democratic. He was coming from our movement, and hence we were supposed to be invited to send a representative. And we would have sent a representative. It would have been highly unlikely that we would have sent Comrade Mario as he is our leader, a position we would have fallen back to for a mandate during the deliberation. Secondly, the terms of reference that forbid group submissions were not acceptable to us. We were a group that represented a certain interests, and hence whatever forums we would have participated in our mandate would have to espouse and defend those interests. The third reason why we withdrew comrade Mario was that the political ground was skewed in favour of the Royal family; as the 1973 decree, which you have mentioned, was still in place.

PUDEMO was right; the process of the CRC produced a document that ensures the continued enslaving of many Swazi families by one Dlamini family.

Sometime I am very ashamed to be a Dlamini, a family that has oppressed all the other families; Zwanes, Khumalos, Mambas, Hlatjwakos, Mkhaliphis, Masukus etc for over 254 years. This is the family that does not believe that any Swazi who bears another surname other that Dlamini can be a Prime Minister. In the new constitution the other surnames will now lose their old age rights to bear chiefs. By 2020, more than half of this country will have Dlamini chiefs under the new constitution. This is wrong, and it will take 14 years from now for people to say PUDEMO was right.

So, if Comrade Mario had participated in the CRC, people like Qala kaliboli would have said PUDEMO was part of the process and they contributed to the status quo that currently obtains; that of oppressive rule through an undemocratic constitution. We are proud that we saw that coming and we refused to be party to an unjust process that was meant to give birth to an undemocratic social order.

Failed to participate in an eight days hunger strike.

I am not surprised. You have the tendency to join a group, and when outvoted, turn around and blame the people who were your comrades or friends. Why did you join the hunger strike in the first place since it is clear you were a weakling? You nearly died before “your personal case was settled” Qalakaliboli. You should have told the comrades that you would not be able to engage in a hunger strike, and I do not believe someone would have forced you. Remember PUDEMO has been around for 23 years, and you just could not survive eight days. It is clear you could not have made it in our ranks, the struggle is very hot, and it will be hotter as we reach our destination, which is freedom that you and your children will enjoy.

Comrade Kislon Shongwe, a true compatriot and valiant soldier of our struggle.

If there is one member who has contributed immensely in putting PUDEMO in the forefront of our struggle today, it has to be Comrade Kislon. There is no one who has outdone Comrade Kislon when it came to preaching the gospel of disciplined cadres in PUDEMO. His commitment and loyalty to PUDEMO, to the struggle and Swaziland can never be equaled. You can ask any reporter or self respecting Swazi who has interacted with him, and he will attest to that. Comrade KP has led the movement as President before. However, when he was elected to serve in the position of Deputy Secretary General, his current position. He never ran away. He is my deputy, but he is my leader, and I have learnt a lot from him.

Comrade Mphandla Shongwe uncompromising nature.

A lot of people agree it is not right for one family to use 70% of the country’s resources and force the 98% of the people to share the remaining 30%. However, they are too scared to do anything. When people like comrade Mphandlana stand up and challenge the system, and do that uncompromisingly, they are then labeled names. There is nothing wrong with bringing mayhem and disorder against your enemy. The Royal family is the enemy of the people when it does what it does. If we make it difficult for the family to enjoy our resources, what is wrong with that?

Comrade Mphandlana is not unemployable. He is a qualified teacher, and if he had chose to, he could have emigrated like many intellectuals and skilled people who left the oppressive Swaziland for better opportunities in RSA and elsewhere.

SFTU hijacked PUDEMO

Then there must be something wrong with you Qalakaliboli. How can a labour movement hijack a political party? We helped resuscitate SFTU, and we have many members from the affiliate unions. We have always worked together where our programmes converged, and we will still do that in the future. SFTU needs PUDEMO as much as PUDEMO needs SFTU. If you had qualified your statement, I would have tried to help you understand the relationship we have with SFTU and many civic organizations. It is naïve on your side to say the labour movement used PUDEMO.

Military wing

You had never seen a military wing of PUDEMO. When members of PUDEMO decide to form one you will not be told, but will know a true meaning of a military wing. For now there is no military wing because there is no need for one as yet.

King Sobhuza II and being honoured with the order of comrade Oliver Tambo.

PUDEMO respects the ANC and its decisions. As such we have sent a public statement to that effect. The ANC was not coerced into honouring King Sobhuza II. PUDEMO believes the ANC comrades sat down and took a conscious decision to honour the people it regarded as having played a role in the struggle. The name of King Sobhuza II happened to be amongst those and hence he was honoured. I am sure his children are happy with that. What does this honour mean to PUDEMO? The answer is simple it means nothing.

How do we remember King Sobhuza II

We remember that King Sobhuza II was called Mona. And until 1973 we did not know what that name meant, just like we can guess what Qalakaliboli meant. When he took our freedoms in 1973 by orchestrating the constitutional coup and took control of our lives, we knew what the name Mona meant. When I close my eyes I see a man who took my dignity away and gave my soul to his children. If you ask me whether I would have supported him given the honour, I would tell you that it would have been difficult. However, we must remember that this honour had nothing to do with how well he treated his own people or how well he espoused democracy in Swaziland. The honour was on his contribution to the struggle in RSA at some point in his life.

King Sobhuza II signed the 1982 Pretoria accord.

However, it must be remembered that he signed the Pretoria Accord with the Boers in 1982 before he died. This unholy political matrimony with the apartheid regime, contributed to the killing of MK cadres and Swazi nationals in Swaziland. It took the lives of such fine sons and daughters of the soil like Mildred Msomi, Tutu Nkwanyana, Keith Macfadden, Paul Dikeledi, Zweli Nyanda and many others.

Many despots have made contributions to struggles of other countries. Does that make them good people in the eyes of their people, the answer is no. But can they be honoured for such contributions; the answer is, the decision lies with those who received that donation. So it was within the prerogative of the ANC to honour Sobhuza II, and those South Africans who protested were using their democratic right to do so. Remember South Africa is a democracy, not a banana republic like Swaziland.

PUDEMO and votes

The people of Swaziland will decide who to vote for in a true democratic elections which will come someday soon. For now we cannot speculate. Would we miss your vote, certainly not. My father used to hate it whenever a player who does not train or who was undisciplined scored a goal because he said it was a bad example. It is the same with you; if people would know that you could vote for us they may think we have something that we share. They may think we are cowards like you. There is nothing further from the truths, we are no cowards, and hence we disclose our true identities. Not long ago you wrote in March or there about and gave your address as Mpaka. May be you have changed addresses, may be not.

PUDEMO is the future.

I once told my fellow countrymen in one of the late TV host, Knowledge Makhanya’s programmes that those people who wished PUDEMO and political parties away were just fooling themselves. I told everyone who was listening that PUDEMO would be around when the future of Swaziland is decided. I am happy that PUDEMO is here today and is making an impact such that people like Qalakaliboli are really scared because they are about to lose the selfish monopoly over our resources. I am also happy that a lot of people, even those from the conservative camp have realized that political parties are the way to go in Swaziland. I say bravo to Marwick and his Sibahle Sinje, Mfomfo and Inhlava, Absalom Dlamini and Lutfo and Imbokodvo. Welcome and let the game begin.

Conclusion

PUDEMO have made mistakes in the past. There have been incidents of indiscipline within some section of our movement, and there are things in our history, which we wish could not have happened. This has happened to every organization and groups. But, we are proud about the fact that we have acknowledged these in many forums. It is this admission that has helped us manage to do introspection and take action. We have grown over the years and have moved forward. One thing for sure, no one can take away our contribution in the liberation struggle for a free Swaziland. We have fought for every Swazi. We have fought for true freedom for both the oppressed and the oppressor.

I hope this has shed some light on the issues raised by Qalakaliboli when he was exercising his right to his beliefs, twisted as they are.


Yours in the struggle for a free Swaziland,


Bonginkosi Ignatius Dlamini
Secretary General
P.O.Box 187
Simunye

Intensify the border blockade against Swaziland

The People's United Democratic Movement of Swaziland PUDEMO International Office
Australia, Asian and the Pacific Region
E-mail: pudemo@yahoo.co.uk
April 16, 2006


Intensify the border blockade against Swaziland

On April 12, 2006 South African workers and supporters of the struggle for democracy in Swaziland staged successful blockades at all of Swaziland’s borders. The protest was in commemoration of the death of democracy on April 12, 1973. On this fateful day, the late King Sobhuza II suspended the Independence Constitution, declared an indefinite state of emergency and imposed a life ban on political parties. In the 2006 blockades, more than twenty people were arrested and some sustained injuries when the South African Police Service (SAPS) used rubber bullets to disperse the peaceful protest. Those arrested include senior members of the South African labour movement.

Condemn police violence
The People’s United Democratic Movement (PUDEMO) is extremely disturbed by the apartheid-style police violence against South African citizens who participated in a peaceful protest to support the struggle for democracy in Swaziland.

The police violence is abhorrent and unwarranted. It invokes painful memories of a pro-apartheid police establishment whose main goal was to sustain an evil system of government. We did not expect this from a post-apartheid police organisation governed by one of the most progressive democratic constitutions in the world. Police brutality against peaceful political protest is symptomatic of intolerant totalitarian regimes such as the absolute monarchy government of Swaziland. In the lead up to the border protest, the regime in Swaziland warned its citizens against participating in the protest and deployed troops and armed police at its border posts.

Through this brutality, the SAPS has disgraced the South African system of democracy, political tolerance and respect for human and political rights. Thus the conduct by the SAPS must be seen by all as a shameful act which warrants the strongest condemnation possible. Democratic forces around the world must register their disgust against this police violence. PUDEMO is pleased to learn that the police have now released all those who were arrested. However, it is not known whether charges have been preferred against the pro-democracy activists.

Border protest: a commitment to free Swaziland
The border protest, which was organised by the Swaziland Solidarity Network (SSN), is part of an ongoing commitment by the South African public to support the democratisation process in Swaziland. For ten years, SSN affiliated organisations such as The South African Congress of Trade Unions (COSATU) and the South African Communist Party (SACP) have relentlessly upheld their commitment to help free Swaziland. In pursuit of this commitment, SSN and its affiliates have, through peaceful public protest actions, demanded significant democratic change in Swaziland which takes cognisance of international requirements such as those established by the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. On several occasions, the South African-based solidarity network joined the people of Swaziland in their protests against:

· the ban on political party participation in national politics
· the political discrimination embedded within the Commonwealth-sponsored constitution making process
· torture and violence against the democratic and worker’s movements
· political persecution and imprisonment of political and labour activists
· neglect of public responsibility, e.g., the failure to provide basic public healthcare and,
· misuse of public resources to satisfy obscenely lavish royal lifestyles

PUDEMO highly commends and unreservedly endorses the South African people’s support, including the recent border protest. We regard the action to blockade passage of goods and services to and from Swaziland as a form of legitimate public protest to force the monarchy regime to agree to long-standing demands for significant progress towards democratisation.

In view of the geo-economic position of Swaziland, this support is a valuable political asset to the Swazi struggle for democracy. Geographically, Swaziland is almost surrounded by South Africa with only one border with a second country – Mozambique. South Africa is Swaziland’s largest trading partner and Swaziland has a high degree of reliance on this partnership which accounts for about 60% of total exports and 96% of total imports.

Sustained economic action by the South African public, if combined with government policy to economically isolate the monarchy regime, has great potential to yield substantial political results in Swaziland. It is inconceivable that Swaziland would have the capacity to resist sustained economic pressure brought to bear on the regime by a combination of government and public action in South Africa. Such action has potential to generate space inside Swaziland for a business and public revolt against the monarchy regime.


Economic sanctions as effective political weapon: the anti-apartheid experience
Economic sanctions are a widely used form of peaceful protest against repugnant regimes which oppress and neglect their citizens. They were used successfully against the apartheid system in the 1980s. Increasingly, the effects of international sanctions compelled the business sector to enter public political debate. By mid 1980s, the South African business community and transnational corporations began to turn away from the apartheid government. For these corporations, the apartheid state had become a major liability to business because of its recalcitrant position on democratisation. Prospects for business recovery did not rest with the protection of apartheid but with joining the anti-apartheid movement in creating conditions for a stable democratic state. Thus, the way out of the continued impact of international economic sanctions was to retreat from apartheid.

It was against this backdrop that in 1985 a high profile business delegation began to work with the leading liberation movement, the African National Congress led tripartite alliance. This shift in political alliance was a major setback to the apartheid state as it desperately tried to resist demands for wide-ranging political change.

Although international economic sanctions were used successfully in the South African struggle, they were never perceived as the only panacea. Instead, they were part of multifaceted struggles incorporating various strategies including armed struggle, mass action and clandestine activities. Furthermore, support for economic sanctions was not without its critics. The pro-apartheid media (local and international, including the Swazi media) echoed the apartheid government’s opposition to economic sanctions. Foreign governments with strong economic interests in South Africa such as the United Kingdom and United States of America initially opposed economic sanctions but subsequently endorsed them because of a swell in international support for sanctions. Most importantly, fearful of local political backlash, the Thatcher and Regan administrations preferred to remain in office than continue resisting local and international pressure to isolate the apartheid regime. Opposition to economic sanctions was premised on one dominant discourse - that the sanctions would hurt the Black poor people they purported to help.

The ANC, SACP and COSATU rejected this argument as absurd because Black people had not benefited from the system of apartheid. Under apartheid, the socio-economic wellbeing of Black people was grossly and deliberately neglected. The apartheid state exercised minimal responsibility towards the political, social and economic development of the Black population. Instead, it was mostly preoccupied with the wellbeing of the white minority population. It created an oligarchic society characterised by a highly mobile white community with skills and wealth, on the one hand, and highly immobile Black community which had little apart from its labour which was exchanged for very poor recompense.

Swazi media and government reaction against the border protest
The resemblance between opposition to economic sanctions against apartheid and the reaction of the Swazi media against the recent border protest is striking. There are only two daily newspapers in Swaziland and both have opposed the border protest. One of these papers is the royal family-owned Swazi Observer. Given that this paper usually opposes political actions by unions, it was interesting to see the prominent coverage it gave to the Swaziland Federation of Trade Unions (SFTU)’s decision not to participate in the border protest.

Apparently, Jan Sithole, the SFTU’s Secretary General, issued a national notice against the protest claiming that his union was not involved in the planning process. On the day of the protest, the Swazi Observer (April12, 2006) describes Sithole as having acted “bravely”. King Mswati III praised the trade union leadership and workers for putting the country first by refusing to participate in the border protest. The King told the Weekend Swazi Observer (April 15, 2006) that he was:

…encouraged by reports that some leaders of the unions took a well considered decision not to participate.
This shows a sense of maturity and a consideration for the country and its people. Anything that seeks to undermine peace, the economy and the country’s security must be opposed by all.

Cabinet ministers have also commended the union leadership and have paraded the decision as a trophy. The regime’s comments have thus completely disregarded the SFTU’s explanation for its decision. Before and after the border protest, the SFTU leadership issued public statements that the decision not to participate was taken because of breakdown in communication and that it actually supports the border blockade (see Times of Swaziland, April, 13, 2006).

The Swazi Observer (April12, 2006) editorial comment predicted apocalyptic economic consequences of political actions targeting the economy and warns:

No amount of political demands and pressure should leave us a poorer country because then we would be undermining the interests of the people we purport to fight for.
Any action that frustrates trade and business activity is a one-way ticket to gross suffering and vulnerability and should be discouraged at all costs.

A day after the protest, the Times of Swaziland, a quasi-independent daily newsprint owned by a British conglomerate, echoed the Swazi Observer’s commentary. It described the border protest as unacceptable and calls for “serious action by the local and South African Governments” as well as the Southern African Development Cooperation (SADC). According to the Times of Swaziland, “…unions exceeded their mandate to cause untold harm to an economy that supports the workers in whose sympathy they staged the blockade.” These statements overlook the current political culture in South Africa established by the Constitution of the Republic of South Africa Act 108 of 1996. Under the Constitution, South African citizens have rights and freedoms to protest. Constitutionally, the government cannot, as suggested by the Times of Swaziland commentary, punish its citizens for exercising their constitutional rights and freedoms.

The reaction to the border protest is thus reminiscent of the 1980s alliance between the monarchy regime and the Swazi media against international economic embargo on South Africa. During this period, the Swazi media joined hands with the Liqoqo regime and subsequently with the current government of King Mswati III to denounce economic sanctions against apartheid. The regime went further to collude with the South African “death squad” to hunt down anti-apartheid activists in Swaziland. Several ANC members were murdered and “kidnapped” from Swaziland police stations by apartheid agents. This criminal behaviour of the Government of Swaziland was never investigated and reported in the local media. Whilst other states in Southern Africa supported economic sanctions against the apartheid state and gave protection to anti-apartheid activists, the monarchy regime dined with the devil.

Dining with the devil
From the mid 1980s to the 1990s, Swaziland benefited from its pro-apartheid position by acting as a gateway to international markets for South African companies. Within this period, investment from the South African manufacturing sector boosted the Swazi economy which registered healthy growth at an average rate of 7% per annum (WTO, 1998: IMF, 2002). The monarchy spent lavishly on arms, royal palaces and luxurious automobiles.

However, the economy sharply decelerated after the collapse of the apartheid regime in 1994. During apartheid, South African manufacturers had moved to Swaziland to evade international economic sanctions but after 1994, they largely returned to South Africa. There was thus a massive flight of capital from Swaziland which left the Swazi economy in strife. In the early 1990s, the economy slowed down and growth fell to 2.1% at the beginning of the 21st century. The International Monetary Fund (IMF) Country Report of 2006, estimates real GDP growth in Swaziland to fall to 1.8% for the 2005/2006 financial year. This prediction was correct as the Swaziland Minister of Finance acknowledged in his recent budget speech that the 2005/2006 budget “…has been prepared under very hard economic conditions with barely a 2% GDP growth rate.”

Thus the benefits of the 1980s had created a false economy and the position of support for the apartheid economy was misconceived. The flight of capital has been compounded by other factors such as irresponsible public spending, lack of innovation, reliance on climatic economic activities, mismanagement, corruption and most importantly, the absence of political accountability.

Grim economic outlook and social neglect: indications of a failed state
Like the pro-apartheid media in the 1980s, the Swazi media ignores one important aspect of the debate about economic sanctions – that the majority of Swazis gain very little benefit from the current economic system and have much to gain from significant change in the way in which Swaziland is governed. The current system has driven the majority of Swazis into abject poverty. They have been caught in a treadmill and are hurting now.

Assessments of the level of poverty in Swaziland give a grim reading. Government budget records show that from 2002/3 to 2004/5 financial year, the number of people living below the poverty line (less than US$1 a day) has increased from 65% to 69%. In desperation, Swazis are increasingly resorting to informal loan sharks to survive and are being charged interest of up to 360% per annum. The King’s response has been to tell Swazis to improve their budgeting skills and to save part of their income for emergencies (see the Weekend Swazi Observer, April 15, 2006). He cautioned “his subjects” against “careless borrowing” and advised them to apply a “strict regime of ‘saving for rainy days’” (Ibid). King Mswati III has completely missed the point that Swazis have no money to buy bread today and certainly have no spare cash to save for later. For most Swazis, there are no financially sunny days any more – all are “rainy days”. The country is facing an economic meltdown and the proliferation of loan sharks is merely one of the more obvious signs of a failed state.

The King’s response symbolises the obscene disconnection between the rich and the poor in Swaziland. It is reminiscent of the comment which has come to symbolise the position of the aristocracy in the French Revolution. When told that the poor people had no bread, Marie Antoinette is reported to have said “let them eat cake”.

The King’s response is also profoundly unSwazi and again demonstrates the fraudulent nature of his claims to be the guardian and arbiter of Swazi culture. One of the strongest and deepest values of Swazi culture is Ubuntfu - a communal approach to life and deep sense of responsibility to others. Our tradition is to help people who are poor and struggling in life. Our tradition is not to criticise that person and call them stupid or lazy. Yet this is precisely what King Mswati III has done. He is telling the majority of Swazis who are living below the poverty line that their poverty is the result of their lack of budgeting, not due to his profligacy and contempt for the welfare of Swazi citizens.

Whilst the government spends lavishly on the royal family household and politicians, the majority of Swazis have no jobs, nothing to eat, are sick and dying because of the acute lack of healthcare services. Unemployment is estimated at 30% and much higher among the youth population (IMF, 2006; Government of Swaziland, 2006).

More than 20% of the population of approximately 1.1 million, an equivalent of 220, 000 people, are living with HIV/AIDS. In 2003 alone, 17, 000 adults and children died from HIV/AIDS (WHO, 2004). In Swaziland the death rate amongst adults is exacerbated by the high prevalence of tuberculosis, an infection that can be adequately contained and eradicated through effective health policies. The World Health Organisation (June, 2005) observes that with a ratio of 1:3 adults infected, “…Swaziland faces a generalised HIV/AIDS epidemic”.

However, WHO is incorrect in its assessment of government response to the HIV epidemic. According to WHO, “the Government of Swaziland has demonstrated a high level of political commitment to fight HIV/AIDS since the start of the epidemic” in 1987. Contrary to this observation, the high infection rate is a result of state neglect of its responsibility and duty of care to protect its citizens through effective containment policies. Swaziland authorities were very slow to understand the potential impact of HIV/AIDS and actually discouraged people from using condoms. Current neglect of the healthcare system by the government shows that there is still a serious lack of political commitment in fighting the epidemic.

In 2005, Swaziland’s authorities refused to join the rest of the world to commemorate the annual World Aids Day because it was held during the time of the sacred Incwala ceremony. Incwala is a sacred traditional ritual which represents the spiritual renewal of the nation and affirms our belief that life is sacred. Traditionally, it is a symbol of hope and healing, particularly when the nation is under siege from natural disasters such as drought and disease. The ceremony draws tens of thousands of young and old men, and many Swazis continue to appreciate its significance. HIV/AIDS campaigns share the core values of Incwala – renewal of the nation’s health and the protection of life. The coincidence of Incwala and World Aids Day presented an opportunity to the authorities and the HIV/AIDS campaigners to raise awareness of the epidemic and promote positive health messages. A combination of these ceremonies would have had long-lasting effects, particularly among the older generation and rural population which have strong sense of Swazi traditions. It would also have provided the King with a well-overdue opportunity to make amends for his disastrous initial response to HIV in which he declared the use of condoms to be “unSwazi”. The decision not to commemorate World Aids Day was short-sighted and yet again reveals the truly careless and incompetent response of the regime to the HIV epidemic. The failure to grasp the opportunities offered by the coincidence of Incwala and World Aids Day shows the absence of innovative ideas and leadership among the ruling elite and its determination to ignore the biggest threat ever faced by the Swazi nation.

With 70% of farmers engaged in subsistence food production, the high rate of HIV/AIDS has almost incapacitated the capacity of rural households to produce sufficient food supplies, even in good rainy seasons. Assessments by the Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) and World Food Programme (WFP) published in 2006 show that “many households are facing chronic and acute food insecurity, which is not merely caused by poor climatic conditions, but is also compounded by the effects of HIV/AIDS and a general economic decline.”

The healthcare service in Swaziland is a disgrace and the authorities should hang their heads in shame for this acute neglect. Health facilities such as the Mbabane Government Hospital illustrate the government’s complete failure to meet its responsibilities. Reports in the local media have revealed horrific conditions at the Mbabane Government Hospital including assault of patients, rat infestations, sanitation problems and inadequate pharmaceutical, food and water supplies. (see Times of Swaziland, 17/12/05; 28/12/05; 26/02/06). Investigative journalists from The Times of Swaziland (26/02/06) describe the situation at the Mbabane Government Hospital:

Instead of giving hope for life to patients, the place simply sucks life away from them day after day until they die. Once they are admitted there, there is simply no hope that they will come out alive.

The place is dirty and it stinks.

The smell is now permanent and there are allegations that some nurses are shunning this particular ward because of the terrible state it is in. This is where patients are made to drink water that is also used to flush away their waste. The same water is also used to wash the sick patients.

“We have no option but to wash them here because there is no other place where we can wash them,” commented one patient.

Just when he was speaking, a female came with a bucket full of human waste to deposit in the sink where he was washing his dishes.

“This is a norm, we have no other place where we can deposit our waste this is because the toilets do not flush and even if they did, there is no water to run the waste,” commented another patient.

On April 15, 2006, the Swazi News (Saturday Times of Swaziland) reported yet another water crisis at the Mankayane government hospital. The hospital has had no water for a week due to a burst pipe which could have been repaired within a day. However, this was not done and hospital authorities decided to send patients home as the crisis worsened. Meanwhile, the government had the audacity to spend over E200,000 (approx. US$33,000) of public funds on luxurious curtains for the Prime Minister’s residence. The cost of fixing the water crisis at the Mankayane hospital would come nowhere near the money spent on the curtains. Whilst public health facilities have no running water and Swazi citizens are denied the basic right to healthcare, the Prime Minister barricades himself behind luxurious curtains. The sick at Mankayane hospital have gone home to die and the Prime Minister cannot be seen behind his curtains –a symbol of visual separation and indifference to the painful experience of many Swazis.

The economic situation in Swaziland is grim and shows no signs of improving. Swaziland is digging deeper into international reserves to finance the waste of public resources and the lavish lifestyle of those in authority. According to the 2005/6 budget reports, the economy registered a deficit of 4.3% of GDP. Whilst the economic situation continues to decline, corruption, misuse of public resources, political neglect and financial mismanagement are on the increase. Recently, more than E50 million (approx. US$8.2m) has disappeared without trace and no one in government is willing to take responsibility. This money was earmarked for the purchase of a water drilling rig which would have made a difference in supplying water in rural areas where the bulk of the poverty stricken population lives.

In view of the economic trends over the past 10 years, it is inconceivable that a solution to the economic crisis can be found in the existing system of government. The Swaziland business community and foreign investors should realise that the current system of government has become a big liability to economic growth and business prosperity. As the South African business community realised in the 1980s, the solution to this crisis is the creation of a stable democratic state with a new social contract between citizens and structures of governance. It is in the interest of the Swazi business community to come out of their cocoons and help hasten the change to democracy.

Our people are dying, hungry and sick and their situation cannot be resolved through piecemeal political reforms such as the recently adopted national constitution. We all have the responsibility and moral obligation to give Swaziland a chance to rejuvenate.

Appeal to the Government of South Africa and South African citizens
For over twenty years now, PUDEMO has been relentless in its endeavour to fight for political change through peaceful engagement with the monarchy regime. We have appealed to the international community to seriously consider economic sanctions against this repressive regime. The emphasis of our appeal has been on South Africa because of its geo-economic position.

PUDEMO reiterates its appeal to the Government of South Africa to stand up for democracy in Swaziland and impose comprehensive economic sanctions against the monarchy regime. In our view, if comprehensive sanctions are imposed, it will take a relatively short period before the monarchy relents to demands to open up space for significant political change. The recent border blockade has reopened the debate on economic sanctions as a form of struggle with great potential to yield political outcomes. Results from the one-day border action are already evident. Government officials including the head of state, King Mswati III, have been drawn into the public debate about the political crisis in Swaziland. Comments from King Mswati and his ministers reveal their fear of economic sanctions. The hysteria about the border protest shows that economic sanctions have the capacity to bite deep into the regime. South African citizens together with their government can effectively exploit this vulnerability to hasten broader political change and decelerate the slide into socio-economic decay in Swaziland. A slide into further decay in Swaziland threatens peace and security in the region.

The South African public, led by SSN and its affiliates, has taken the initiative to help the people of Swaziland bring the repression and economic decay to an end. PUDEMO supports this and calls for the intensification of the economic blockade against the monarchy regime. We appeal to the South African public to stay the course and not to relent under scare tactics that economic sanctions will hurt the poor. Our people now look up to the Government of South Africa to seriously reconsider this issue and take a leadership role against the recalcitrant regime in Swaziland. For too long now, the world has turned a blind eye on the political crisis in Swaziland. King Mswati III and his ministers have been at leisure in their endeavour to undermine regional and international aspirations of responsible governance and democratic practices. Consequently, Swaziland has, for a considerable period, been a stagnant backwater where nothing happens because international organisations such as the Commonwealth have decreed that nothing must happen.

In reaction to the border protest, King Mswati was quick to refer to the Commonwealth endorsement of the constitution making process which he described as inclusive. He also claimed that there are structures in Swaziland through which citizens can express dissatisfaction with the political condition. The argument is ridiculous, nonsensical and grossly misleading. No one with knowledge of the political situation in Swaziland would believe it. It contradicts the Constitutional Review Commission Terms of Reference which prohibited political and civic organisation from participating in the constitution making process. The product of this process, the Constitution of the Kingdom of Swaziland Act, 2005 upholds the ban on party participating in national politics.

Political intolerance and hostility against critics are core elements of the current system of government founded upon the King’s Proclamation to the Nation on April 12, 1973. It is against this background that the government has refused to open dialogue with the pro-democracy movement in Swaziland and to constructively contribute to international efforts to improve the quality of governance. The prohibition of political party participation in national politics grossly undermines the principles and aspirations of the New Partnership for Africa’s Development (NEPAD). One of these aspirations is to see that “Africa adopts and implements principles of democracy and good political economic and corporate governance, and the protection of human rights becomes further entrenched in every African country” (NEPAD). It is regrettable that the Government of Swaziland has, to this date, not signed up to NEPAD’s Africa Peer Review Mechanism (APRM) designed to monitor and assist progress towards quality governance in Africa. This recalcitrant position is characteristic of a totalitarian and secretive regime determined to stifle regional progress. The absolute monarchy is a political system born of another age. The time to change it is well overdue and South Africa’s contribution to Swaziland’s development is absolutely crucial.

Signed:


Dr Jabulane Matsebula
PUDEMO Representative
Australia, Asia and the Pacific Region

President Mario Masuku's briefing to diplomats

President Mario Masuku's briefing to diplomats
Invitation to all civilised humanity:
Join us in the march towards a new and democratic Swaziland

A turning point in the history of Swaziland

Distinguished guests,
Friends and allies in the struggle for human dignity,

Please receive, on behalf of the National Executive Committee of PUDEMO and all the struggling people of Swaziland in general, warm and fraternal greetings at this historic moment in the political life of our country. We take this opportunity to welcome all of you and appreciate your interest in this subject matter that has escaped international headlines for far too long.


1. Background to the political crisis in Swaziland

The country called Swaziland is in geo-political terms situated between South Africa and Mozambique with a population of about 1.2 million people and occupying a space of about 17 000 square kilometers. This means it is a relatively small country, but well endowed with natural resources and a rich heritage, as well as fairly good climate.

However, this small country is facing big political problems arising out of a crisis of royal hegemony and the failure of imposed authority by a system which vests all powers in the hands of a tiny minority to the total exclusion of the majority of the people.

The system of royal oppression takes the institutional form of a political architecture called “tinkhundla”. If apartheid used race to exclude other people and safeguard the privileges of one group over another, then tinkhundla uses “royal bona-fides” or royal relations to serve the same purpose. Therefore, if in the context of humanity’s resolve to broaden the frontiers of dignity for all apartheid was declared a crime against humanity on the grounds of its brutality against the majority of the
people, then there is no question whatsoever that the tinkhundla system is equally a crime against humanity.

With these few reflections, we do not only seek to raise uncomfortable questions about global standards of acceptable governance, but to further deepen discussion about the challenges facing the international community in resolving global conflicts and building a global society based on the
ideals of democracy, peace and justice.

The people of Swaziland, of necessity, are playing their part in this whole process of seeking to create a new and truly democratic Swaziland. They have defied all odds to mount a mass movement for democracy led by their political voice and proud representative, PUDEMO. Everywhere in Swaziland, the people are on their feet demanding justice; workers at the workplace, students in institutions of learning, the poor and unemployed
in communities, believers in churches, the landless masses in rural areas are all speaking in one voice, demanding an immediate end to the system that has caused untold suffering to our country and its people.

They are demanding a system that seeks to end; poverty, reckless spending, economic plunder, destruction of the environment, women and children abuse, and oppression in all its forms. All this is not possible without fundamental and thoroughgoing changes in the country’s political system. Tinkhundla must be removed and in its place, a truly democratic system must be created. This is the lasting solution to the crisis facing our
country. No amount of desperate quick-fix solution will bring about the desired stability and progress. No amount of military might and proficient strategy will bring about a real political solution, because the problem is political and not military, such that only through genuine political dialogue rooted in popular participation, can a lasting solution be found. Finally, like all other people, Swazis want progress and prosperity.


2. Historical development of the ruling system in Swaziland

Developments in Swaziland are primarily linked to developments in the whole Southern African region, particularly South Africa. This means, the historical development of the Swazi political system remains integrally linked to or can only be understood through tracing the development of the whole region, with more emphasis on South Africa.

There are three distinct periods in the development of the tinkhundla political system;
· Pre-colonial period and the making of a dynasty
· Colonial period and the making of a repressive modern state
· Post-colonial period and the consolidation of royal supremacy through the tinkhundla project

Swaziland was colonized by Britain (though we are told it was a
protectorate, as if it meant some form of benevolence) from 1902 until 1968 when the colonialists handed over power to the royal aristocracy of Swaziland. The British had left in place a constitution which by any standards allowed a fair space for democratic engagement, which was repealed by the monarchy in its desperate thirst for power in 1973 through a royal decree whose provisions entailed, inter alia;
· Banning of political parties
· Banning of the most basic rights and freedoms to associate, organize and speak, as well as all forms of political activity
· Proclamation of a perpetual state of emergency, which is effective to date.

Recently there has been speculation to the effect that the decree has been removed with the coming into force of the new royal constitution. It is important to clarify the confusion surrounding this matter, because what the regime has done is to formalize and institutionalize further the contents and provisions of this decree as a core element of the new
constitution being paraded as the heralding of democracy in our country.

In this sense, it may no longer need a separate document containing these, because the constitution is a revised version, though in advanced form, of the 1973 king’s decree. If this is what some commentators call victory for democracy, then we have a reason to be worried.

The scrapping of the 1968 constitution by the late king Sobhuza 11 and its replacement by the 1973 decree was also informed by the advice of the Afrkaner Broederbond Society through its agent Van Wyk De Vries, a Pretoria advocate. It must be remembered that the threat to the apartheid regime at the time was the liberation movement of South Africa, particularly the ANC-led Alliance, which prompted the apartheid regime to realize that its own survival lies in consolidating closer and stronger
ties with and supporting what it called “like-minded” regimes. Amongst these was Mobutu Seseseko of the then Zaire (now DRC), Hastings Kamuzu Banda of Malawi and the Swazi monarchy, who had come to constitute, together with their apartheid patrons, the axis of resistance to freedom and democracy.

After the banning of the constitution and political parties in particular, the system called tinkhundla came to constitute the political vehicle through which royal hegemony was to be entrenched by the monarchy. It was formally introduced in the political scene of Swazi society in 1978. Its official introduction came with an electoral system based on an electoral
college through which people were to elect at tinkhundla centers
(constituencies), electees who were to constitute the electoral college and not parliament.

Only the electoral college could elect parliamentarians from a list provided by the royal house, who were to then constitute the parliament of the kingdom of Swaziland. In this sense, it was guaranteed that the ultimate product of this process is composed of members of the ruling system or at least those blindly loyal and sympathetic to it. This is on top of a politically sophisticated parliamentary system, in which the
upper house, Senate comprised of the most staunch stalwarts of the system, particularly chiefs and princes, who had veto powers over the house of assembly in the case of “deviations” from the official line (royal interests). This parliamentary form of gate-keeping is still in command in the current system, though in an even more sophisticated and subtle form, as an upgraded model of the same.


3. The Road towards democracy begins:
The Birth of PUDEMO in 1983 as a watershed moment in the history of Swaziland

The consolidation of royal supremacy through the formalisation of tinkhundla as a political system of Swaziland left the people with no alternative or hope for change without waging a mass based struggle for democracy. This led to workers, students, rural and landless masses, women of different religious, racial and social backgrounds coming together on the 6th July, 1983 to form the People’s United Democratic Movement (PUDEMO) as their legitimate representative and co-ordinator of the struggle for democracy in Swaziland.

In its founding provisions, they proclaimed that, “We, the people of Swaziland met on the 6th July, 1983 to form the People’ s United Democratic Movement, to represent fully the interests of the people of Swaziland and to unite them against undemocratic governance, oppression, exploitation, unfair discrimination, corruption, nepotism and favouritism. We declare to the world that Swaziland belongs to all its people regardless of race, colour, sex, religion or social status and that
PUDEMO is our true representative. We dedicate ourselves to struggling together in unity until final victory”.

It must also be remembered that part of the basis for PUDEMO formation related to its internationalist duty to assist the liberation movement of South Africa in the struggle against the brutal clutches of apartheid, particularly after a realization that Swaziland can never be liberated or democratic while South Africa was still under apartheid, because of the well known policy of aggression by the apartheid regime.

The intensified persecution of anti-apartheid activists on Swazi soil by a joint force of the apartheid regime and their tinkhundla counterparts confirmed the need for a political intervention on Swazi soil. This persecution saw the deaths of many ANC cadres, amongst them; Zweli Nyanda, Mildred Msomi, Cassius Make, Paul Dikeledi just to mention a few (for
elaborate details please refer to the South African TRC report on Swaziland). This was not by accident, but a deliberate effort on the part of the Swazi regime and its apartheid ally, because as early as February, 1982 a secret non-aggression pact was signed between the two regimes, which was immediately followed in 1984 by the Extradition treaty, which allowed the apartheid regime to extradite cadres of the anti-apartheid movement from Swaziland to South Africa, most of who later died in the hands of the racist regime.

In this sense, the birth of PUDEMO in 1983 signalled two important and interlinked events:
- The beginning of organized resistance and challenge to the tinkhundla regime and the nearing end of royal oppression in Swaziland, and
- The organized challenge to the open collaboration between the tinkhundla and apartheid regimes, to accelerate the process of moving towards a free and democratic South Africa, ultimately leading to a free and democratic Southern Africa, with Swaziland included.

PUDEMO worked consistently from the underground to build a mass movement for democracy until the regime rounded up the leadership of the movement in the now famous treason trial of 1990. However, the trial did not succeed in dampening the fighting spirit of PUDEMO and the mass of the oppressed people of Swaziland in general, instead it bolstered their
confidence and inspired an unprecedented wave of mass activities for democracy and social justice throughout the whole country, as workers, students, rural masses, churches, women and all organs of social organization began to articulate their demands in an even more clearer way than before, all of which hinged on the need for fundamental change and democracy in the country.

This explains why today the whole Swazi society speak with one voice that, a day more without democracy means more unbearable suffering and terror against the democracy-loving people of our country. The struggle for democracy is at the heart of the solutions we need to build a new and prosperous Swaziland in all facets of our society.


4. The situation in Swaziland today

The tinkhundla regime is on the warpath against the democracy-loving people of Swaziland

The Swazi regime continues to inflict legislative and political terror upon the people as the political atmosphere in the country has become even more grim and threatening reflecting the growing insecurity of the regime, which despite its arrogant posture has never been so isolated not only from the mass of the people of our country, but also from world public opinion. Alarmingly, there are signs that, with the full connivance of the ruling authorities secret squads are beginning to operate in Swaziland.

The several attempts on individual comrades’ lives is one example of the numerous assaults, tortures, arbitrary arrests and all forms of persecution on men and women who refuse to bow to the tyranny of tinkhundla. Families of political activists are daily being terrorized by the regime in its desperate attempt to crush, through force of arms, the democratic movement and instill fear amongst the oppressed and struggling masses.

The tinkhundla ruling system of Swaziland is facing a deep irreversible crisis. Years of royal misrule has plunged our country into a permanent crisis of; economic decline, massive poverty and unemployment, the HIV and AIDS disaster, women and children abuse in the holy name of Swazi culture, as well as the all-round political instability characteristic of our country today.

In the recent past we have seen the following indicators of the worsening crisis;
- The intensified arrests of PUDEMO and SWAYOCO activists for holding peaceful demonstrations and spreading the message of liberation throughout all corners of the country

- The closure of two independent newspapers by the monarchy for reporting uncomfortable truths about Swaziland

- The overruling of judicial rulings by the king and the subsequent resignation of the whole bench of the Court of appeal

- The massive arrests of trade union leaders for demanding the right of workers to organize, as well as improved conditions of work

- The massive evacuation of communities in the eastern part of the country; Kamkhweli and Macetjeni for refusing the recognize an imposed royal puppet as their chief. These people were forced to flee the country for their safety and in the process lost their property and suffered serious disruption in their lives as workers, students and ordinary citizens of the country.

- The extravagant royal spending spree and intensified economic plunder that has caused severe economic bleeding and resulted in a social decay as regards social services for the majority

These are just some of the prime features of Swazi society today and they are explained in no better terms than the way the 2006 Budget presented by the minister of finance and those preceding it, have shown the continued skyrocketing military or security expenditure, presumably to safeguard people who are hungry. This means more and more security for less and less food. The indicators are terrifying to say the least;

· HIV and AIDS stand at around 40%

· Unemployment is around 40%

· Disinvestment and lack of new investment in the country have resulted in deepening socio-economic crisis

· Declining sources of revenue for government, which has resulted in the regime resorting to extreme anti-poor means of raising revenue. The decline and threat of ultimate loss of SACU (Southern African Customs Union) is a glaring example

· The alarming increase in the number of insecure, casual and highly inhumane jobs, which have tremendously lowered the dignity and living standards of our people

· The crisis of landlessness is on the increase and threatens the very future of stability, as the regime has resorted to the strategy of forceful evictions as a means to re-organise the economy or resolve the crisis

· The scourge of corruption has eaten into the core of our society and turned every sphere of Swazi society into an extension of the wholly corrupt system as a whole.

This situation has resulted in a new resolve by the oppressed people of Swaziland and a rejuvenated determination to find a lasting solution to the country, which unfortunately is not possible without the accompanying sacrifices of jail, torture, inhumane treatment and all sorts of suffering to which those who stand for justice must, of necessity go through.

On the other hand, people have resorted to all sorts of methods to secure their freedom, amongst others, an armed response to the perpetual violence of the state, which situation has given a justification to the regime to carry out its long held desire to militarise our country and turn the whole Swaziland into an army barrack.

As PUDEMO, we wish to state clearly and unequivocally that we are still committed to a negotiated settlement to rescue our country from the ills of tinkhundla crisis. We are still committed to methods of struggle that do not seek to divert us from our proven record of peaceful engagement. We however, want to warn seriously that our patience is not limitless. We love our country and our people and for that we are not prepared to bow down on our knees and tolerate suffering forever, we only hope sanity will prevail in the minds of the royal powers that be.

This leads us to the next issue of the massive arrests against PUDEMO and SWAYOCO activists whose only crime is that of their political affiliation and commitment to the cause of democracy, hence they are rotting in tinkhundla jails. Their arrests have nothing to do with what they did, but what they believe in. The ideas they stand for, as espoused by the movement, are so powerful, they threaten the very foundation of royal injustice and corruption.

About 18 activists of PUDEMO and SWAYOCO are facing charges of treason. They were immediately rounded up after the string of bombings that shook the whole Swaziland recently. The regime has failed to bring forward concrete evidence, except to link the political ideas of the comrades and their membership to PUDEMO to acts of treason, such that being a member of the movement is a treasonable offence in Swaziland. Instead, the regime has resorted to acts of terror against other activists outside jail to fabricate evidence and trump up charges, secured through torture to implicate other comrades.

I can testify myself to the unbearable conditions in Swazi jails, certainly because I have been a regular visitor myself. This imposes upon all of us the urgency of doing something practical NOW to secure their release.

But further, we must clarify that their release should not be for the sake of it, but as an integral element of the struggle to secure the release of all the people of Swaziland from the Royal prison called tinkhundla, which has suffocated our people for the past 33 years.

Torture, poor habitation conditions, poor diet and solitary confinement are the daily experiences faced by the comrades in jail. They are the conditions the regime learnt from their apartheid patrons over the years, which calls for immediate international attention and action. Amnesty International released a report on the abominable jail conditions in
Swaziland sometime back, but since then conditions have worsened even more. We have seen numerous deaths in jails relation to torture, amongst the most recent are the wife of one of the arrested comrades, Mduduzi Mamba, Mathousand Ngubeni and Mthokothoko Mamba, to mention a few. Deaths in jail are becoming a daily experience and “normal” feature of Swazi society, if not an integral part of our country’s life.

While the focus is on those who are in jail, we also have those who have been forced out of their own country into exile by the same conditions, with the most recent group having left Swaziland a few days away. On top of that, we have those who are still inside the country but whose lives are nothing less than hell itself. They are daily victims of police raids, instant detention and torture after which they are immediately released,
those who are daily subjected to police surveillance in their private and general lives, etc. All these are pointers of a society that has become militarized to the core. The question is what should be done. I am sure none of us does not know what should be done, because the answer to that is; we should all intensify our efforts to support the movement for democracy in Swaziland, practically. We have neither the luxury of time
nor the leisure of academic debates about it.

As we talk, we have a comrade, Brian Shaw, who was shot by the police for no other reason than their own desperacy and frustration about the case that can't produce tangible evidence, hence putting them in the spotlight about fabricating lies about PUDEMO. He has been refused access to lawyers, his parents denied access to him, comrades could not be allowed to see him, and everybody else could not see him for days. This was part
of the strategy to ensure that by the time everybody else sees him, he should have recovered from the wounds of the bullet, so as to destroy all evidence against the state. Brian was shot by the police who then later tried to criminalise his case and claim he was running away on criminal charges. The list goes on and on about the acts of terror that we are daily subjected to in the country we call home.

Finally, we seek to clarify the situation with regard to the on-going constitutional crisis as an element of the political crisis in general.


The tinkhundla royal constitution has gone through several stages;

· Announcement of several Royal commissions, purportedly to gather the views of the people about the direction the country should take in political terms, which was in response to the pressure PUDEMO and the mass democratic movement as a whole, with the trade union movement as a key player, were putting for change and a new constitutional dispensation for Swaziland

· Consolidation of those views gathered under very politically hostile conditions of intimidation, police terror and state of emergency

· Formal introduction of the finished product to the public and the world

In all these stages, there have been key characteristics, such as attempts to buy time and divert the issues from the core matters facing the country into some artificial and trivial discussions about our country, whipping up values of prejudice against democracy as foreign and unSwazi, as well as intimidating all those whose views differ with the system, including their frequent arrests and victimization from work, as well as in their places of residence.

The regime tried to silence PUDEMO and the trade union movement by co-opting some of us into the process as commissioners, but it could not succeed as the principled character of PUDEMO came to the fore, when the National Congress of the movement resolved that we can only participate in a constitutional process under pinned by the following conditions:

Time-frames and clear processes for a national forum of all stakeholders in Swaziland to discuss the future of the country; political parties, trade unions, women and youth organisations, religious and faith-based organisations, business, professional and academic institutions, etc;

Time-frames for the removal of all laws that militate against democratic change, in particular the most problematic elements of the 1973 king’s decree;

Time-frames for a transitional authority in Swaziland to oversee the smooth process of change;

Immediate guarantee of the most basic rights for all; free expression, free assembly, free organisation, etc;

But on the contrary, the conditions that gave birth to the current constitutional product of the regime have been;

Hostile political environment; arrests, detentions, torture and systematic persecution of innocent people for their belief in democracy

Lack of basic freedoms to expression, assembly, organisation and the general state of fear and reign of terror enforced by the 1973 king’s decree

Systematic and organised offensive against any semblance of judicial independence, media criticism, worker’s organised power and all the institutions that work to protect the interest of the people, in the absence of formal political space in the form of political parties

Continued dominance of the political stage by members of the royal family and their friends, hence the overwhelming dominance of princes, chiefs, princesses and hangers-on of the system in the constitutional team and related commissions.

Systematic propaganda demonising multiparty democratic as evil, foreign and divisive in order to instil a sense of loyalty to the tinkhundla system. This was made possible by the regime’s limitless access to the media which became the key instrument of character assassination against the progressive movement which enjoys no access to the media.

Civic education of a special type, which in actual fact was state propaganda meant to instil tinkhundla values amongst the people.

Political parties and political space in general remain closed, such that free political debate has not been possible to ensure the mass involvement of the majority of the people of Swaziland.

These and many other reasons led to the principled stand and position of the progressive movement in general, PUDEMO in particular, which said that the process cannot deliver the real solution to the serious political and constitutional problems of the country. The overwhelming majority of the people of Swaziland in their organised and unorganised forums expressed
their unequivocal rejection of the process, as a window-dressing mechanism of the system to renew, rather than abolish the system of royal oppression.

On the issue of a constitution, as PUDEMO we have consistently remained primarily committed to genuine dialogue as expressed in our document entitled, “Wayforward towards a Constituent Assembly through a negotiated settlement”, whose provisions states clearly that,

‘In keeping with this noble resolve, we welcome any genuine invitation to all organised formations, registered and unregistered, to a properly constituted and representative constitutional forum that will be mandated to work the wayforward for Swaziland. However, to safeguard against a
repeat of the political blackmail and socio-economic evils of the tinkhundla legacy, there are important pre-conditions that should be satisfied.”

The satisfaction of these pre-conditions is of utmost importance to us, because we have learnt through bitter experiences what kind of a regime is the tinkhundla royal regime.

We cannot take chances about people’s lives and raise their hopes and expectations beyond what is real, to such an extent that the people lose faith in the very cause of democracy and justice.


5. Towards a free and democratic Swaziland through intensified mass action and international solidarity


Our goal is very clear; to destroy the system of tinkhundla royal supremacy and in its stead, establish a truly democratic society.

It was on the 12th April, 1973, when the late king Sobhuza 11 proclaimed to the nation that, `

“Now therefore I, Sobhuza 11, king of Swaziland, hereby declare that, in collaboration with my cabinet ministers and supported by the whole nation, I have assumed supreme power in the kingdom of Swaziland and that all legislative, executive and judicial power is now vested in myself and shall, for the meantime by excercised in collaboration with my cabinet ministers. I further declare that to ensure the continued maintenance of peace, order and good government, my armed forces have been posted to all strategic places and have taken charge of all government places and all public services” (section 3)…………………………………………all political parties and similar bodies that cultivate and bring about disturbances and ill-feelings within the nation are hereby dissolved and prohibited” (section 11, 1973 King’s decree to the nation).

Any struggle cannot progress until the people have the courage to organise and fight and the will to sacrifice and readiness, if needs be, to die! Our will and determination to be free has now gone beyond the point of general remarks into concrete and clear time-frames for democratic change.

The issue today is not whether or not freedom will come. The question is on which side you should be – whether to perish with tinkhundla or to triumph with the forces of democracy and change. Freedom is within sight, the horizons of democracy are ever drawing nearer on a daily basis.

Therefore, anyone seeking refuge in the tinkhundla house shall perish with it. The flames of revolution and justice are unstoppable. This is why anyone talking dialogue with a violent and treacherous system can only succeed in misleading the people and betraying the ideals for which our movement was formed. This is not the time for tea breaks, but the moment we have been waiting for all along, to bury the royal demon once and for
all.

By refusing to be bullied into acceptance of the enemy’s constitutional schemes, we reaffirmed our determination to defend the integrity of the Swazi people in pursuit of a common victory against a common enemy. We are asserting the truth that freedom is indivisible, that democracy for some is democracy for none, and hence, that no section of the people can be free while another is oppressed.

On the shoulders of the tinkhundla regime rest such crimes as the scandalously high infant mortality rate amongst our children, the HIV and AIDS genocide, the unemployment disaster and the general crisis that bring about endless misery for our people in their own country. Swaziland is littered with graves of young men and women, patriots of our nation and future hopefuls of our country who are victims of the viciousness of the system. Therefore, we have no reason to relax, our nation is dying out slowly like a candle in the wind.

Swaziland is in flames and no one can afford to sit by and watch as the royal regime massacre agents of hope and democracy. Who can deny that time is against us in the quest for human dignity. We are individually and collectively responsible for all lives lost to tinkhundla brutality, therefore, we must act NOW to save a whole nation from a looming catastrophe and possibly, a civil war.


6. The future belongs to the people!
The Programme towards a new and democratic Swaziland

The Swazi regime is daily arming itself with the most dangerous weapons of war, which constitutes a threat to world peace. Yet the tinkhundla regime, in its turn is only able to continue its murderous system and piracy because of the support it receives from “like-minded” regimes throughout the world.

This is where the international solidarity initiative comes in, providing the momentum for an intensification of the campaign to cut links with the brutal regime of Swaziland. As the crisis mounts to its peak, let all humanity vow that it will tolerate no further delay in the application of effective pressure against Swaziland in support of the suffering and struggling masses of our country.

The young people of Swaziland, organized workers and freedom fighters in the ranks of the democratic movement, are daily demonstrating their courage and determination, their willingness to sacrifice in the fight for freedom. It is not only in their interests, but in the interests of progress and human security for all of the world’s peoples, that PUDEMO and the mass democratic movement in general are calling for a meaningful
response to the call for anti-tinkhundla solidarity. The agony of tinkhundla must be ended. We urge all democracy-loving people to recognize their responsibility to do something practical NOW to help bring an end to it.


To this end, we have identified pillars of our short-term programme in the current period, which are;
· Rolling mass action to demand the release of all political prisoners through mass rallies and other forms of mass activities

· Creation of mass awareness through exploring alternative media and information avenues to counter the misinformation campaign of the tinkhundla regime

· Deepen our work amongst all organs of social mobilization to build a mass movement against tinkhundla, in the country and internationally

· Build PUDEMO to assume fully its role as the hope of the Swazi people, ready and capable of leading the whole country towards a new and democratic society

These elements of our programme forms the basis of our continued struggle on the ground, but they do not substitute our will to engage in dialogue, whenever reasonable and dignified people.

Finally, we shall be convening an urgent Conference of the movement to clearly outline our medium-to-long term programme, which envisages a real and qualitative advance to people’s power in Swaziland.

We cannot delay any further, we must adopt concrete measures in our search for an alternative system to the crisis of tinkhundla. This programme shall include all elements and stages of a real challenge to the system for a lasting solution in our country. We are sure after that Conference, the history of Swaziland shall be written anew.


We thank you all!

The Government of Swaziland parades “state witness” against political prisoners

The People's United Democratic Movement of Swaziland
PUDEMO International Office
Australia, Asian and the Pacific Region
E-mail: pudemo@yahoo.co.uk
February 13, 2006

Smoking Gun or a Replica?
The Government of Swaziland parades “state witness” against political prisoners


On February 7, 2006, the office of the Director of Public Prosecution (DPP) unexpectedly brought the high treason case against Mduduzi Dlamini for trial. Mduduzi is one of the 16 pro-democracy activists arrested between December 2005 and January 2006 when the Royal Swaziland Police pounced on members of The People’s United Democratic Movement (PUDEMO) and its youth wing The Swaziland Youth Congress (SWAYOCO). The pro-democracy
activists were charged with a string of offences ranging from arson to high treason. They are accused of petrol bombing state buildings and private property belonging to members of the ruling regime. Some of the detainees, including Mduduzi, are due to appear before the High Court for a hearing on their bail applications on March 7, 2005.

The case against Mduduzi was heard by a single judge, Justice Mbutfo Mamba. Mduduzi pleaded guilty to the charge of treason and was sentenced to two years in prison with an option of E10 000 (approximately $US1, 600). Half of the sentence was suspended and the High Court deferred payment of the fine (approximately US$800) to March 31, 2006. After the
brief trial, Mduduzi was released pending payment of the fine by the due date. This was an extremely lenient sentence and generous conditions of payment, given the seriousness of the charge which carries a possible death penalty or life imprisonment.

In a surprising twist, the DPP did not oppose the lenient sentence. Earlier, the DPP strongly opposed applications for bail arguing that the public is frightened of the detainees and that “they will endanger the maintenance of Law and Order and national security” (see The Swazi Observer, January 1, 2006). On January 17, 2006, the acting Director in the DPP’s office, Mumsy Dlamini, again opposed applications for bail and pleaded with the High Court not to release the detainees including Mduduzi. The reason for this change of heart is obvious – the DPP will now use Mduduzi as its trump card and an example of the existence of the “bomber”.

We don’t know what prompted Mduduzi to plead guilty to the charge of high treason and to implicate PUDEMO but we have reason to believe that he might have been coerced. According to local media reports (see The Times of Swaziland and The Swazi Observer, February 8, 2006), Mduduzi told the Court that he was acting with other PUDEMO members under orders from the organisation’s leadership to attack state infrastructure. In his plea of guilty, Dlamini asserted that he:

…unlawfully engaged in conduct with the intent to overthrow the Kingdom and/or coerce the Kingdom by violence into certain actions. I acted with hostile intent against the government. I am a sympathiser of The People's United Democratic Movement (PUDEMO). At a PUDEMO meeting in March 2005, with senior members of the organisation, I decided to embark on a campaign of bombing government structures in order to overthrow the
Kingdom or coerce it into accepting political change. On the evening of August 6, 2005 I met with members of PUDEMO in Mbabane.
We travelled to Sidzakeni in a vehicle of which the registration plates had been removed. Our intent was to throw a petrol bomb at the Sandleni Inkhundla, a government structure, in furtherance of our hostile intent.
In the late hours of the same day we arrived at our destination. I opened the gate and the vehicle entered. I followed in foot. An accomplice and myself spilled petrol on the door and the accomplice set the petrol alight by means of a petrol saturated cloth. We left the scene while the doors were still burning” (The Swazi Observer, February 8, 2006)

There are a number of anomalies in this statement, particularly the last paragraph. Firstly, parts of the first and second paragraphs read as if they are directly lifted from the charge sheet which reads:

The accused persons each or both of them acting jointly in furtherance of a common purpose did, unlawfully and with hostile intent against the kingdom to overthrow or coerce the government of the kingdom.

Secondly, a vehicle travelling at night with its registration plates removed would obviously arouse suspicion and attract police attention. Oddly, Dlamini is claiming to have deliberately acted in a manner which would attract the attention of the police, at the very time that he was also engaged in clandestine activity for which the penalty may be death.
Furthermore, the entry of the vehicle into the premises of the Sandleni Inkhundla constituency would have undoubtedly alerted the security guard.
Mduduzi states that he opened the gate and gives the impression that the gate was unlocked at the time. As Tinkhundla constituency premises are used for storing valuable material for community development projects, it is normal practice to secure these premises with a fenced structure, a lockable gate and the services of a security guard. It is therefore not clear why a gate of a secured facility was unlocked at the time of the
alleged attack.

Thirdly, it has been alleged by the police, the DPP and the media that the accused persons used explosive devices to commit the offences. At no time have these institutions publicly explained what, in their view constitutes an explosive device. The terms “bomb”and “explosive device/charge” have been widely used to generate public fear and give credibility to state
allegations of terrorist threats.

Mduduzi’s statement exposes the abuse of these terms. There is nothing in his statement that suggests that a bomb or an explosive device/charge was used to set fire to the Sandleni Tinkhundla constituency. For example, he indicates that the building was set alight by spilling petrol and setting
it alight with a petrol-saturated piece of cloth. The Worldreference.com English Dictionary defines explosive device as “device that bursts with sudden violence from internal energy”. Explosive charge is defined as “quantity of explosive to be set off at one time.”

Yet the Honourable Justice Mamba appears to be labouring under the belief that Mduduzi did use an explosive device. Thus, the honourable Judge erred in law by failing to closely examine the defendant’s statement. It appears that he convicted Mduduzi not on the evidence of the accused and his accusers but on the advice of the defendant’s lawyer. In his judgement, as
reported in The Swazi Observer (February 8, 2006), Justice Mamba
commented:
Your lawyer has advised me that you are a sympathiser of the People's United Democratic Movement (PUDEMO) though I have not been told its ideals and the change that you wanted.
What I have been told is that you wanted to destroy government structures and overthrow the Kingdom. I have not been told that you wanted change, whether for the better or worst.
Your lawyer has further informed me that you were in the company of others you conspired with to destroy the Sandleni constituency by throwing an explosive charge. It was submitted that the door to the structure was damaged, but I was not told to what extent. According to the Times of Swaziland (February 8, 2006), the defence lawyer also advised the Judge that “the accused was coerced in the participation of the offence.” However, this allegation does not appear in Mduduzi’s statement as it is given in The Swazi Observer (February 8, 2006).

Justice Mamba’s statement raises important questions about the defence lawyer’s advice to the court and as a consequence, about the authenticity of the defendant’s plea of guilty. For example, was the defendant in the right state of mind to make the decision? Did he have adequate knowledge of the charge and the DPP’s evidence against him? Did he receive proper legal advice about the implications of incriminating himself in a charge
of this nature? Did Mduduzi jump or was he pushed? Did the legal system provide adequate protection to Mduduzi against compulsory
self-incrimination?

PUDEMO leadership is treating the events relating to this hearing with extreme caution and a high degree of suspicion. We are waiting for a copy of the court transcript to determine the full nature of this case. Given the regime’s reputation of torture, we have reason to believe that the plea of guilty was made under duress. In the 1990 treason trial against
PUDEMO members, the state coerced two people to give false testimonies in court. This backfired when the two confessed in court that the testimonies were made under extreme duress.

It is puzzling that Mduduzi was brought in for trial before his
application for bail was heard. As noted earlier in this document, Mduduzi was among the detainees awaiting the hearing of their bail application in the High Court on March 7, 2006. It is not yet clear when this pending hearing was removed from the registrar.

Furthermore, like the other detainees, Mduduzi was charged with a string of offences including high treason, sedition, attempted murder and malicious damage to property. However, he was tried and convicted on one charge - high treason. Again, it is not yet clear whether or not the other charges have been withdrawn or the DPP is keeping them as a dagger in its back pocket.

Combined, the events associated with this trial arouse curiosity about the intentions of the state. For a while now we have harboured suspicions that the state was working hard to turn Mduduzi into a state witness. Since his arrest in December 2005, he has been completely isolated from the rest of the detainees and PUDEMO officials were prohibited from making contacts
with him. Unlike the rest of the detainees, Mduduzi instructed his own legal representative making it extremely difficult for PUDEMO to access information about the case. At the time of the trial, PUDEMO had made arrangement to get power of attorney from Mduduzi to transfer the case to lawyers instructed by the organisation to represent the detainees. The state pre-empted this arrangement and conspired with Mduduzi’s legal
representative to secretly bring the case to court without due public notice. There was no hint whatsoever that a high profile case such as this one was scheduled for hearing. In anyone’s imagination, this was speedy trial which is uncharacteristic of the speed at which courts in the country deal with cases.

The plea of guilty is not the smoking gun the government is hoping to use to generate public fear and tarnish the good name of PUDEMO but a replica which presents no threat to our reputation as a peaceful movement for democracy. It is a throw away line from a regime desperate to salvage its badly damaged political image. Corruption, misuse of public monies, poor
economic performance and neglect of basic public services have badly damaged the government’s credibility to govern. The government is now trying desperately to hide behind an illusion of a terrorist threat to avoid dealing with these issues. The government can keep looking for the smoking gun but it won’t find one because there isn’t one. Through this plea of guilty, the state hopes to make the terrorist illusion stick to the public psyche. We will fight this act of political bastardry by
exposing the true intention behind the Mduduzi case.

We have confidence in the people of Swaziland that they will view this latest development for what it is – a cheap shot and crude plot against political parties and those who represent progress in Swaziland. In 1973, the monarchy government under the leadership of King Sobhuza II lied and conspired against the Ngwane National Liberation Congress (NNLC). Today they are abusing the judicial system to concoct lies about PUDEMO in an
attempt to resuscitate the 1973 discourse about political parties as destructive and disruptive.

There is not an ounce of truth and credibility in Mduduzi’s statement that senior PUDEMO officials discussed and approved a policy of violence to coerce the state. From the 1990s to date, PUDEMO has publicly defended accusations from the local media, the police and government officials that it is responsible for petrol bomb attacks against state infrastructure. Unlike the government, we have a clear policy of resolving the political
crisis at a non-violent political level. We have invited the government for talks but it has refused to open dialogue with PUDEMO and the broader movement for multi-party democracy.

As stated previously, the government has no strategy other than violence and innuendoes to engage with political parties at a political level. Under the 1973 King’s Proclamation, the state violently suppressed political parties wishing they would go away. Realising that political parties would never go away and are now an integral part of Swazi society, the regime invented a lie about terrorism to justify the exclusion of party politics from the Constitution.

The Commonwealth Secretariat, a recent major player in Swaziland politics, also ignored PUDEMO’s call for a collective peaceful approach to the political crisis. Instead, the Commonwealth under the leadership of Don McKinnon, advised the Government of Swaziland to shut out political parties from the constitution making process. Consequently, the process delivered a constitution which bans democracy and political parties. On
February 10, 2006, McKinnon was in Swaziland to celebrate the death of democracy at the inauguration of the Constitution.

Let it be known that PUDEMO is a disciplined and transparent organisation with a clear political direction and policies guiding our action. We collectively pledge to liberate the people of Swaziland from the absolute monarchy repression through peaceful means. This policy has not changed and remains the mainstay of our struggle for multi-party democracy and
responsible governance. As a disciplined organisation, PUDEMO has rules and all members abide by these rules. Those who decide to deviate from these rules and engage in activities that are contrary to our policies effectively remove themselves from the organisation. PUDEMO and SWAYOCO are therefore NOT GUILTY, your Honour !

Dr. Jabulane Matsebula
PUDEMO Representative
Australia, Asia and the Pacific Region

MEMORANDUM: PUDEMO’s RESPONSE TO MEDIA REPORTS

MEMORANDUM: PUDEMO’s RESPONSE TO MEDIA REPORTS.
SUBJECT:‘BOMB SUSPECT ADMITS TO HAVE TAKEN PART IN BOMBING OF INKHUNDLA’.
DATE: 9th FEBRUARY 2006.

1.0. Introduction.

The current state of affairs in Swaziland comes in the backdrop of a situation where Comrade Mduduzi Dlamini, one of the suspects in the bombing case that has drawn local and international attraction, was arrested and incarcerated ALONE for long periods at the remote Nhlangano Prison. It comes from the scenario of constant harassment, torture,
insults, beatings of suspects, intimidation and the threat to evictions by traditional authorities of families and relatives of the suspects. The wife to Mduduzi Mamba, one of the suspects sadly died of trauma immediately following interrogation by the royal Swaziland police (who admitted in their response to inquiries that she had been uncooperative during the interrogation).

The state fails to establish a reasonably prosecutable case against any of the suspects, save only to bundle up their investigations and please the Mswati regime who had instructed the police to arrest as many PUDEMO and SWAYOCO members as possible before the end of 2005. We have proof that more than four of our members have been coerced by Khethokwakhe Ndlangamandla and others into making self-incriminating statements and to ‘volunteer’ to be state witnesses. Most of these comrades have rejected the offers with the contempt they deserve. Comrade Mduduzi Dlamini may not have had that opportunity to withstand that pressure.

Even though political party affiliation is prohibited by law in Swaziland, Mduduzi Dlamini has a right to enjoy his fundamental freedoms, including those of association, expression and assembly and, therefore, his membership or not to the People’s United Democratic Movement (PUDEMO).

2.0. The State Of the Suspects.

The comrades in Mbabane, Matsapha Central, Nhlangano and Manzini prisons are strong and principled members of the organization, and we do not doubt their allegiance and commitment to the organization’s objectives. We stand by them, and are in contact with them and their families whenever possible. In spite of continued attempts to by the state, and other people who claim to be messiahs, to manipulate the comrades’ lack of legal
understanding, the suspects are consistent on their principles.

3.0. The Justice Course.

PUDEMO acknowledges that the members currently in custody are innocent until proven guilty, and the onus lies on the crown to prove their guilt. We have no reason to doubt the capability of the presiding judicial officers in this case and believe that they are honorable enough to uphold the principles of an independent justice in an environment respecting the rule of law.

We, however, have strong reservations on the manner comrade Mduduzi Dlamini was secretly hauled into the High Court for a confession when he (and the rest) were still to argue for bail, let alone plead. The statements that he allegedly made are so clear that he was spoon-fed to not only incriminate him but the other co-accused. This practice is
common in undemocratic states as previously seen in Mozambique, Zimbabwe and The Republic Of South Africa recently.

We also find it strange that a suspect charged for high treason together with 15 others, is eventually singled out and ‘tried’ separately. We also note that the comrade did not make these admissions under oath, and still, they were admissible in court. Our observations here are not with intentions against Mduduzi Dlamini, but on the commissions and omissions by the prosecution and the judicial processes which all raise doubts about
the ‘trial’.

4.0. PUDEMO and Its Position.

We reiterate that at this moment the issue is not and should not be who is responsible for the attacks, but what their root cause is. The country is in such deep crisis due to the arrogance and intransigence of the royal tinkhundla regime, and this crisis gives birth to the people’s actions in quest for their freedoms. The people in Swaziland are angry for many reasons; from the rapid job losses, abject poverty, education system, evictions, declining standard of living, independence of the three arms of government, violation of the fundamental human rights and the overall lack of good governance. For these core demands, PUDEMO believes that people will vent their anger in any way at their disposal, and history teaches us that constructive dialogue and negotiation help avoid such situations.

In 1992, PUDEMO issued a document entitled The Way Forward To A Constituent Assembly Through A Negotiated Settlement as a proven mechanism for a sustainable people-driven, all-inclusive and owned transition to a democratic Swaziland. The royalist regime arrogantly rejected this peaceful program, and opted for a unilateral Mswati driven reform process sponsored by the Commonwealth Of Nations, the European Commission,
cessationist Taiwan and other proponents of repression and custodians of perpetual suffering of the poor African masses. PUDEMO is ready for any round table negotiations for a peaceful settlement in spite of the constant violent response on our unarmed members during peaceful marches and rallies.

We reaffirm our position on the current constitution that irrespective of whatever reforms that may have been unilaterally done in exclusion of representative stake-holders, the process MUST go back to the people through democratic processes of a national forum up to a constituent assembly stage for the people’s full ownership. Anything short thereof is nothing but cosmetic and will only be to the benefit of the monarchy and its surrogates. We call on the local and international community to see and view this position, and also the royal tinkhundla regime visa vis the conventions it is signatory to eg; the NEPAD and its APRM, the Harare Declaration, the African Charter and People’s Rights, the ACP/EU Cotonou Protocol the only way it is – dictatorial.

5.0. Conclusion.

The arrests and recent admission by Mduduzi Dlamini are nothing else but attempts by the regime to silence the voice of opposition in Swaziland, in particular, PUDEMO and its youth league, SWAYOCO. We are not shaken by these clandestine moves, but they only strengthen our resolve to have a constitutional multi-party democracy in Swaziland. We are ready for talks towards this goal, but time is not on our side, and time comes when people say enough is enough and when time for such dialogue wanes.

We are waiting!


Official Statement Of PUDEMO
From the President’s Office.
09th February 2006. Ref.PR17/06PO

SWAZILAND CANNOT BE AN ISLAND OF DICTATORSHIP AND REPRESSION IN A SEA OF DEMOCRACY.