THE STATEMENT
FROM THE PEOPLES UNITED DEMOCRATIC MOVEMENT
ON THE ASSASSINATION OF OUR DEPUTY PRESIDENT, COMRADE DR. GABRIEL THANDOKUHLE MKHUMANE.
09th APRIL 2008
The peoples President, comrade Mario T. Masuku and the entire National Executive Committee mourn the demise of the Movement's Deputy President, Comrade Dr. Gabriel Thandokuhle Mkhumane, who was assassinated a week ago in Nelspruit, the Republic of South Africa.
We extend our heartfelt condolences to the late comrade's wife, Zoraida, his two sons Lizwi and Lizo, to his mother, Gogo Shongwe, members of both families, members of staff at the Themba Hospital, PUDEMO and all her structures and all members of the mass democratic movement in Swaziland and beyond.
We have all lost a son, a father, husband, brother, a friend and companion, a humble and loving, hard working man that will be irreplaceable. PUDEMO has lost a father figure, a leader and a revolutionary of unequalled proportions. The Comrade was a down-to-earth people's man who had, as his second love, the liberation of the oppressed masses of our country, Swaziland. We have lost a committed visionary and strategic leader who feared nobody but the people he so honestly, loyally and constantly served all the time.
The comrade would still be alive had the royalist regime in Swaziland respected the political rights and determination of the country's citizens, and he would not have skipped the country into exile. PUDEMO condemns the callous, ruthless and self-centered cold blooded assassin who took away the life of a people's chosen leader in such a manner. We implore that the local Police Services to leave no stone unturned and track and apprehend this perpetrator and let the law take its course.
We are not deaf and blind to the visits in recent years to the deceased's home by the Swaziland secret police personnel, who confronted Gogo Shongwe, enquiring and intimidating her about the Comrade and eventually vowed that he would come back home only as a dead man. This wish by the state has now been fulfilled, and should members of the organization, the poor and helpless people of Swaziland sit down and lick the wounds?
In spite of this temporary setback, PUDEMO remains focused on the national democratic revolution and the liberation of the masses of our country from the quagmire and crisis into which the royalist tinkhundla regime has immersed our country. We now even owe to our fallen leader to take the torch with all our pillars of the struggle, for the tree of liberation has been watered by his blood.
PUDEMO humbly extends her comradely appreciation to those countries that have accepted and accommodated our members in exile, and we acknowledge the roles played by our allies particularly in the neighboring states. Their international solidarity is of necessity at this particular phase of our struggle as we intensify the call for a democratic Swaziland, and more of our members may seek political shelter in these countries in the not so distant future.
There will be a memorial service on Friday, the 11th April at 1300hrs at the Agricultural Hall, Nelspruit followed by a night vigil at the Rugby Stadium from 2100hrs until the early morning, the funeral commences from the stadium at 0700hrs and then we proceed to the Rocksdrift Cemetery in Nelspruit.
Building a Popular Movement for sustained liberation struggle.
Issued By the National Executive committee of [PUDEMO Swaziland]
For more information contact
Mario Masuku- PUDEMO-President
Cell: +268 608 3338 or
Sonkhe Dlamini [PUDEMO International Secretary Based in RSA]
Cell: 27-82 923 1401
Wednesday, April 9, 2008
Monday, January 28, 2008
PUDEMO STATEMENT Dysfunctional leadership at the University of Swaziland: a symptom of a failing state
PUDEMO STATEMENT
Dysfunctional leadership at the University of Swaziland: a symptom of a failing state
Over the past weeks there have been numerous reports about the conflict between students and the administration at the University of Swaziland (UNISWA). This conflict stems from the so-called semisterisation or academic restructuring designed from the ivory tower and imposed on students. When students expressed concerns about these changes, the university authority responded, as it always has done, with threats, intimidation and violence. Regrettably, these hostile tactics have arrested development at the university.
In December 2006, the administration closed down the university after a student protest against the contentious academic structure. When the university reopened on January 2007, the administration failed to provide leadership and resolve the impasse. Instead, it insisted on implementing the restructuring program through threats, intimidation and violent tactics. Reminiscent of the township siege during the apartheid reign of terror in South Africa, the administration called in armed paramilitary police units to occupy university grounds. Members of the academic staff were threatened with dismissal from their jobs when they protested against the presence of armed paramilitary units.
Such behaviour by a university administration is abhorrent. Resorting to the barrel of a gun and threats rather than appealing to intellectual reasoning reflects a serious failure of leadership. It clearly demonstrates the dysfunction in this bureaucracy and its extreme irresponsibility. The way in which the administration has handled this situation has done serious harm to the reputation of the university as an institution responsible for producing the country's intellectual resources. If the people at the helm of the institution are incapable of providing role models, how does the university hope to achieve its mission?
It is obvious that there is widespread dissatisfaction with the restructuring process and that these changes have not been thought through by the university administration. The current conflict suggests that the administration does not have an effective plan to manage the restructuring process, but instead relies heavily on bullying tactics. There are strong indications that the administration did not endeavour to effectively communicate and negotiate the reasons for the structuring process and its implementation with students. For example, did the administration consider other means of achieving its goals? A staged implementation programme allowing a smooth transition from the current to the new structure would have avoided the conflict. Under this approach, the restructuring process could have been introduced to first year academic programmes allowing students in current programmes to continue uninterrupted. A well-thought through restructuring process would have an inbuilt sunset clause. In this case it would mean that schools across the university will continue to offer the old programme to current students and the new programme to a fresh intake. The old programme would then be phased out after the last cohort of current students had graduated.
We wonder if the administration has a plan to evaluate the impact of the changes on teaching, learning and academic outcomes. If the changes are implanted along the dual academic structuring process, it would require the development of a compatible evaluation programme with clearly established performance indicators. We would suggest a two-staged evaluation process - internal evaluation and external evaluation. The internal evaluation will assess the effectiveness of the changes on different areas of scholarship and will require a high level of leadership capable of responding to periodic evaluation outcomes. Evaluation should be conducted at the end of each semester, focusing mainly on student and academic staff assessment of teaching and learning under the new programme. One would assume that under the new programme, the university and different schools will develop new graduate attributes. The external evaluation should therefore, as a principle, measure the benefits of the programme to society after its first "birthday". It should cover graduate and industry evaluation. For example, to what extent has the new academic programme improved employment opportunities for graduates and how has it contributed to better outcomes in various industries and public service? That is, are graduates of this programme more or less equipped to offer the human resources the country needs for future development?
As an organisation committed to good governance, democracy, service delivery and effective leadership, we call upon the university authority to reconsider its approach to the administration of this very important institution. PUDEMO supports calls from student and academic staff bodies for the withdrawal of armed paramilitary units from university grounds. Whilst we welcome the suspension of the implementation of the restructuring process pending the court outcome, we remain concerned about the failure of the university administration and the ministry of education to deal with the situation. This is a shambled job characteristic of bad management. Bad managers are incapable of managing conflicts without resorting to heavy-handed tactics. A functioning leadership would think carefully about the implications of restructuring processes and it would endeavour to discuss and negotiate aspects of these processes with all stakeholders. Conflicts are inevitable in processes of change and they can be constructive or destructive depending on the way in which they are managed.
While the university's behaviour is indubitably appalling, it is unfortunately little more than the latest visible lesion in the diseased body of Swaziland's administration. The university's heavy-handed approach reveals the poverty of its leadership and it is utterly consistent with the way business is usually conducted at the highest levels of authority in Swaziland. Unfortunately, the royal family has entrenched a culture of dictatorship in which peaceful debate is responded to with state violence against citizens. The national administration has a well-established record of incompetence and aggression which has brought Swaziland into the realms of failing statehood. Year by year, we see severe crises in the core social institutions of the country. The administration of law and order, of health care and of education is never far from collapse in Swaziland and lurches from crisis to crisis. The ongoing marginal functioning of these institutions and the recurrent crises are due to poor leadership and the dictatorial way of doing business in Swaziland.
The university has, regrettably, become the latest visible symptom of this political malaise, but it has always aped and aided the monarchy's dictatorial practices. From the days of the notorious Liqoqo regime in the early 1980s to the current period, the university has had no visionary leadership independent of the ruling royal family's political influence. Over the years, the administration has established a strong McCarthyist culture determined to purge the state's "enemies" from the university. From the early 1980s, generations of university students have opposed the authoritarian royal family rule and called for the introduction of a democratic system of governance. Consequently, the administration and the government see students as a hostile constituency. In many ways, this has contributed to the failure of leadership at the university to respond effectively to genuine concerns of students.
In our view, the way in which the university is managed has rendered the institution dysfunctional. This is an old fashioned style of higher education management and has generated disharmony between the student body and the administration. In the 21st century, universities around the world have pensioned off the authoritarian ivory tower management style and crafted a new identity as student-centred institutions. Serving the interests of the student population is a primary goal of 21st century universities. Swaziland University is profoundly outdated and this compromises the international standing of its educational programmes and devalues the qualifications of its students. If students are to be fit to take their place as intellectuals and society leaders, the university will have to teach them something beyond bully tactics and intimidation. Why should students bother to attend a university which has nothing to offer beyond bullying – this kind of knowledge will not help them to influence society in a positive way although it might of course prepare them well for a high-ranking government post under the current regime. Students might well ask themselves whether an institution which acts as a dictatorship and uses paramilitary forces to silence peaceful debate is really a university at all. It is a failing institution in a failing state and has little to offer students who wish to make a difference in Swaziland and beyond. Thus, there is an urgent need for far-sweeping changes in this deeply dysfunctional culture at the University of Swaziland and other Swazi institutions.
Signed:
Dr. Jabulane Matsebula
PUDEMO Representative
Australia, Asia and the South Pacific Region
Dysfunctional leadership at the University of Swaziland: a symptom of a failing state
Over the past weeks there have been numerous reports about the conflict between students and the administration at the University of Swaziland (UNISWA). This conflict stems from the so-called semisterisation or academic restructuring designed from the ivory tower and imposed on students. When students expressed concerns about these changes, the university authority responded, as it always has done, with threats, intimidation and violence. Regrettably, these hostile tactics have arrested development at the university.
In December 2006, the administration closed down the university after a student protest against the contentious academic structure. When the university reopened on January 2007, the administration failed to provide leadership and resolve the impasse. Instead, it insisted on implementing the restructuring program through threats, intimidation and violent tactics. Reminiscent of the township siege during the apartheid reign of terror in South Africa, the administration called in armed paramilitary police units to occupy university grounds. Members of the academic staff were threatened with dismissal from their jobs when they protested against the presence of armed paramilitary units.
Such behaviour by a university administration is abhorrent. Resorting to the barrel of a gun and threats rather than appealing to intellectual reasoning reflects a serious failure of leadership. It clearly demonstrates the dysfunction in this bureaucracy and its extreme irresponsibility. The way in which the administration has handled this situation has done serious harm to the reputation of the university as an institution responsible for producing the country's intellectual resources. If the people at the helm of the institution are incapable of providing role models, how does the university hope to achieve its mission?
It is obvious that there is widespread dissatisfaction with the restructuring process and that these changes have not been thought through by the university administration. The current conflict suggests that the administration does not have an effective plan to manage the restructuring process, but instead relies heavily on bullying tactics. There are strong indications that the administration did not endeavour to effectively communicate and negotiate the reasons for the structuring process and its implementation with students. For example, did the administration consider other means of achieving its goals? A staged implementation programme allowing a smooth transition from the current to the new structure would have avoided the conflict. Under this approach, the restructuring process could have been introduced to first year academic programmes allowing students in current programmes to continue uninterrupted. A well-thought through restructuring process would have an inbuilt sunset clause. In this case it would mean that schools across the university will continue to offer the old programme to current students and the new programme to a fresh intake. The old programme would then be phased out after the last cohort of current students had graduated.
We wonder if the administration has a plan to evaluate the impact of the changes on teaching, learning and academic outcomes. If the changes are implanted along the dual academic structuring process, it would require the development of a compatible evaluation programme with clearly established performance indicators. We would suggest a two-staged evaluation process - internal evaluation and external evaluation. The internal evaluation will assess the effectiveness of the changes on different areas of scholarship and will require a high level of leadership capable of responding to periodic evaluation outcomes. Evaluation should be conducted at the end of each semester, focusing mainly on student and academic staff assessment of teaching and learning under the new programme. One would assume that under the new programme, the university and different schools will develop new graduate attributes. The external evaluation should therefore, as a principle, measure the benefits of the programme to society after its first "birthday". It should cover graduate and industry evaluation. For example, to what extent has the new academic programme improved employment opportunities for graduates and how has it contributed to better outcomes in various industries and public service? That is, are graduates of this programme more or less equipped to offer the human resources the country needs for future development?
As an organisation committed to good governance, democracy, service delivery and effective leadership, we call upon the university authority to reconsider its approach to the administration of this very important institution. PUDEMO supports calls from student and academic staff bodies for the withdrawal of armed paramilitary units from university grounds. Whilst we welcome the suspension of the implementation of the restructuring process pending the court outcome, we remain concerned about the failure of the university administration and the ministry of education to deal with the situation. This is a shambled job characteristic of bad management. Bad managers are incapable of managing conflicts without resorting to heavy-handed tactics. A functioning leadership would think carefully about the implications of restructuring processes and it would endeavour to discuss and negotiate aspects of these processes with all stakeholders. Conflicts are inevitable in processes of change and they can be constructive or destructive depending on the way in which they are managed.
While the university's behaviour is indubitably appalling, it is unfortunately little more than the latest visible lesion in the diseased body of Swaziland's administration. The university's heavy-handed approach reveals the poverty of its leadership and it is utterly consistent with the way business is usually conducted at the highest levels of authority in Swaziland. Unfortunately, the royal family has entrenched a culture of dictatorship in which peaceful debate is responded to with state violence against citizens. The national administration has a well-established record of incompetence and aggression which has brought Swaziland into the realms of failing statehood. Year by year, we see severe crises in the core social institutions of the country. The administration of law and order, of health care and of education is never far from collapse in Swaziland and lurches from crisis to crisis. The ongoing marginal functioning of these institutions and the recurrent crises are due to poor leadership and the dictatorial way of doing business in Swaziland.
The university has, regrettably, become the latest visible symptom of this political malaise, but it has always aped and aided the monarchy's dictatorial practices. From the days of the notorious Liqoqo regime in the early 1980s to the current period, the university has had no visionary leadership independent of the ruling royal family's political influence. Over the years, the administration has established a strong McCarthyist culture determined to purge the state's "enemies" from the university. From the early 1980s, generations of university students have opposed the authoritarian royal family rule and called for the introduction of a democratic system of governance. Consequently, the administration and the government see students as a hostile constituency. In many ways, this has contributed to the failure of leadership at the university to respond effectively to genuine concerns of students.
In our view, the way in which the university is managed has rendered the institution dysfunctional. This is an old fashioned style of higher education management and has generated disharmony between the student body and the administration. In the 21st century, universities around the world have pensioned off the authoritarian ivory tower management style and crafted a new identity as student-centred institutions. Serving the interests of the student population is a primary goal of 21st century universities. Swaziland University is profoundly outdated and this compromises the international standing of its educational programmes and devalues the qualifications of its students. If students are to be fit to take their place as intellectuals and society leaders, the university will have to teach them something beyond bully tactics and intimidation. Why should students bother to attend a university which has nothing to offer beyond bullying – this kind of knowledge will not help them to influence society in a positive way although it might of course prepare them well for a high-ranking government post under the current regime. Students might well ask themselves whether an institution which acts as a dictatorship and uses paramilitary forces to silence peaceful debate is really a university at all. It is a failing institution in a failing state and has little to offer students who wish to make a difference in Swaziland and beyond. Thus, there is an urgent need for far-sweeping changes in this deeply dysfunctional culture at the University of Swaziland and other Swazi institutions.
Signed:
Dr. Jabulane Matsebula
PUDEMO Representative
Australia, Asia and the South Pacific Region
Monday, January 7, 2008
PUDEMO STATEMENT Protecting the Integrity of the African Unity (AU): Swaziland Forced to Withdraw Candidate from the AU Election
Protecting the Integrity of the African Unity (AU): Swaziland Forced to Withdraw Candidate from the AU Election
International Office
Date: January 7, 2008
Behind the scenes protest against the nomination of the former Prime Minister of Swaziland for the AU leadership election has yielded results. The Government of Swaziland has now withdrawn Dlamini's nomination for the Chairperson of the AU election due in January, 2007.
Unfortunately, the Swazi government has not been honest about its decision to withdraw Dlamini's nomination. It has promoted the story that it took this decision in support of a unified Southern African Development Community (SADC) campaign to present one candidate from the region. However, this explanation is not consistent with the Swazi government's behaviour. For example, why did it wait until the last minute before withdrawing its nomination of Dlamini? Furthermore, if the government believed that Dlamini was a strong candidate for the position, it should have been promoting him as the consensus candidate for Southern Africa and lobbying for regional support. Instead, the government pulled him out of the election race altogether.
The government's story is thus at odds with its behaviour and highly dubious. However, to most observers, the reason for its action is obvious. The Swazi government withdrew its nomination of Dlamini because it was unable to attract support for his campaign. The SADC and AU are organisations committed to democratic governance. If they had supported Dlamini's candidacy, the integrity and credibility of these organisations would have been severely undermined because of his terrible record in office and the refusal by Swaziland's dictatorship to adhere to SADC and AU principles of democracy.
Since his appointment as Swazi Prime Minister in 1996, Dlamini presided over some of the worst political crises in Swazi history and his government was marred by controversies and bad judgements. From 1996 to 2003, he led the authoritarian regime and he is currently a member of King Mswati III's Advisory Council, a body that has vigorously opposed the transition from royal authoritarianism to democracy. Selected from the royal family inner circles, the Advisory Council is the monarchy's eye of power making sure that public institutions and citizens conform to the royal authoritarian system. As a result, the Advisory Council exercises enormous political
influence in Swaziland's politics and is well known for its ruthless intolerance of political dissent. Dlamini also served in previous governments as Minister of Finance (1983-1992) including the notorious Liqoqo regime known for its brutality against government critics, corruption and disregard for the rule of law. Human rights abuses under the Liqoqo regime between 1983 and 1986 are well documented by various international human rights organisations such as Amnesty International. As Minister of Finance, Dlamini was responsible for the growth of a culture of corruption in government and lavish royal spending with dire economic consequences. Today, this culture is well entrenched and continues to paralyse the economy and government services.
In his term as Prime Minister, he was known for extravagant spending on royal luxuries. In 2002, the local and international communities were horrified by Dlamini's secret authorisation of the purchase of a private jet for the royal family at a cost of E450 million (US$45 million). This was a morally bankrupt decision which clearly demonstrated the government's insensibility to the effects of the drought conditions and the HIV epidemic on the general population.
However, Dlamini is probably most infamous for his exercise of naked power in 2000 and 2002 when he ruthlessly suppressed freedom of the press, political freedom and judicial independence. On February 17, 2000 the government closed down the state-owned newspaper, The Swazi Observer, for refusing to reveal sources of articles relating to the Royal Swaziland Police secret activities. A year later, on May 4, 2001, Dlamini's government closed down two independent media groups, The Nation and Guardian of Swaziland, for publishing stories criticising human rights abuses and lavish spending by the government and royal family. In September 1999, the government charged the Times Sunday Editor, Bheki Makhubu, with criminal defamation for publishing an article in which he described King Mswati III's fiancée as a high school drop-out.
As Prime Minister, Dlamini was the architect of the infamous Decree No.2, 2001, a law designed to strengthen the authoritarian position of the absolute monarchy government. Under this Decree, publication of materials containing criticisms of the system of government and its leadership were prohibited. Even the production and publication of satirical materials relating to the royal family such as impersonating the king were declared to be criminal offences punishable with a 10-year jail term. The Decree also gave the Minister of Information the power to unilaterally proscribe media organisations which failed to observe these prohibitions. Thus Decree No.2 reflects the ambition of an over zealous dictatorial regime to rule by fear. To all intents and purposes, the Decree was designed to renew the climate of fear generated by the King's Proclamation of 1973 which had been significantly weakened by the democratic movement led by PUDEMO. Hence Decree No.2 bears all the hallmarks of the 1973 Proclamation which made it a criminal offence to exercise freedom of thought in Swaziland. Ultimately, Decree No.2 was withdrawn because of sustained local and international condemnation. However, parts of this Decree such as the controversial Non-Bailable Order were incorporated into Decree No.3, 2001 which, in 2002 to 2004, was one of the key issues at the centre of the rule of law crisis. As the then Prime Minister, Dlamini must be held directly responsible for this crisis.
From 2002 to 2004, the rule of law in Swaziland was severely harmed when the former Prime Minister abandoned all judicial procedures in preference to brute political force. In what can best be described as a ruthless assault on the integrity of the judiciary, Dlamini declared on November 28, 2002 that the Government of His Majesty would not respect the Court of Appeal judgements relating to three cases – the Non-Bailable Offences Order, the mass eviction of families from Kamkhweli and Macetjeni areas and the committal of senior police officers to imprisonment for contempt of court. In his public address to the nation on November 28, 2002, the former Prime Minister ordered all law enforcement sectors to disobey the Court of Appeals rulings, creating a crisis in the rule of law hitherto unseen in Swaziland's judicial history. All judges of the Court of Appeal resigned in protest against this display of brute political attack on the independence of the judiciary. For two years, Swaziland had no functioning Court of Appeal. Details of these cases can be found in the Amnesty International Report (AFR 55/004/2004) and PUDEMO Report (September 28, 2004).
Clearly, Dlamini is not a suitable candidate for the AU position given his disastrous record in government. This record renders him completely unfit for public office and he should have not been recommended in the first place. Africa, particularly SADC, must be congratulated for its commitment to protecting the AU's integrity by refusing to endorse this tin-pot dictator to take the reins of the organisation.
As an organisation committed to democratic governance and political transparency, we are obliged to expose Dlamini's record and make sure that he is quarantined from international leadership responsibilities. We have an obligation to the people of Africa to protect the integrity of the AU as a forward looking organisation committed to political, economic and social progress. The quality of leaders at the helm of the AU is crucial to achieving the organisation's goals and building its global credibility.
Signed:
Dr. Jabulane Matsebula
PUDEMO Representative
Australia, Asia and the South Pacific Region
International Office
Date: January 7, 2008
Behind the scenes protest against the nomination of the former Prime Minister of Swaziland for the AU leadership election has yielded results. The Government of Swaziland has now withdrawn Dlamini's nomination for the Chairperson of the AU election due in January, 2007.
Unfortunately, the Swazi government has not been honest about its decision to withdraw Dlamini's nomination. It has promoted the story that it took this decision in support of a unified Southern African Development Community (SADC) campaign to present one candidate from the region. However, this explanation is not consistent with the Swazi government's behaviour. For example, why did it wait until the last minute before withdrawing its nomination of Dlamini? Furthermore, if the government believed that Dlamini was a strong candidate for the position, it should have been promoting him as the consensus candidate for Southern Africa and lobbying for regional support. Instead, the government pulled him out of the election race altogether.
The government's story is thus at odds with its behaviour and highly dubious. However, to most observers, the reason for its action is obvious. The Swazi government withdrew its nomination of Dlamini because it was unable to attract support for his campaign. The SADC and AU are organisations committed to democratic governance. If they had supported Dlamini's candidacy, the integrity and credibility of these organisations would have been severely undermined because of his terrible record in office and the refusal by Swaziland's dictatorship to adhere to SADC and AU principles of democracy.
Since his appointment as Swazi Prime Minister in 1996, Dlamini presided over some of the worst political crises in Swazi history and his government was marred by controversies and bad judgements. From 1996 to 2003, he led the authoritarian regime and he is currently a member of King Mswati III's Advisory Council, a body that has vigorously opposed the transition from royal authoritarianism to democracy. Selected from the royal family inner circles, the Advisory Council is the monarchy's eye of power making sure that public institutions and citizens conform to the royal authoritarian system. As a result, the Advisory Council exercises enormous political
influence in Swaziland's politics and is well known for its ruthless intolerance of political dissent. Dlamini also served in previous governments as Minister of Finance (1983-1992) including the notorious Liqoqo regime known for its brutality against government critics, corruption and disregard for the rule of law. Human rights abuses under the Liqoqo regime between 1983 and 1986 are well documented by various international human rights organisations such as Amnesty International. As Minister of Finance, Dlamini was responsible for the growth of a culture of corruption in government and lavish royal spending with dire economic consequences. Today, this culture is well entrenched and continues to paralyse the economy and government services.
In his term as Prime Minister, he was known for extravagant spending on royal luxuries. In 2002, the local and international communities were horrified by Dlamini's secret authorisation of the purchase of a private jet for the royal family at a cost of E450 million (US$45 million). This was a morally bankrupt decision which clearly demonstrated the government's insensibility to the effects of the drought conditions and the HIV epidemic on the general population.
However, Dlamini is probably most infamous for his exercise of naked power in 2000 and 2002 when he ruthlessly suppressed freedom of the press, political freedom and judicial independence. On February 17, 2000 the government closed down the state-owned newspaper, The Swazi Observer, for refusing to reveal sources of articles relating to the Royal Swaziland Police secret activities. A year later, on May 4, 2001, Dlamini's government closed down two independent media groups, The Nation and Guardian of Swaziland, for publishing stories criticising human rights abuses and lavish spending by the government and royal family. In September 1999, the government charged the Times Sunday Editor, Bheki Makhubu, with criminal defamation for publishing an article in which he described King Mswati III's fiancée as a high school drop-out.
As Prime Minister, Dlamini was the architect of the infamous Decree No.2, 2001, a law designed to strengthen the authoritarian position of the absolute monarchy government. Under this Decree, publication of materials containing criticisms of the system of government and its leadership were prohibited. Even the production and publication of satirical materials relating to the royal family such as impersonating the king were declared to be criminal offences punishable with a 10-year jail term. The Decree also gave the Minister of Information the power to unilaterally proscribe media organisations which failed to observe these prohibitions. Thus Decree No.2 reflects the ambition of an over zealous dictatorial regime to rule by fear. To all intents and purposes, the Decree was designed to renew the climate of fear generated by the King's Proclamation of 1973 which had been significantly weakened by the democratic movement led by PUDEMO. Hence Decree No.2 bears all the hallmarks of the 1973 Proclamation which made it a criminal offence to exercise freedom of thought in Swaziland. Ultimately, Decree No.2 was withdrawn because of sustained local and international condemnation. However, parts of this Decree such as the controversial Non-Bailable Order were incorporated into Decree No.3, 2001 which, in 2002 to 2004, was one of the key issues at the centre of the rule of law crisis. As the then Prime Minister, Dlamini must be held directly responsible for this crisis.
From 2002 to 2004, the rule of law in Swaziland was severely harmed when the former Prime Minister abandoned all judicial procedures in preference to brute political force. In what can best be described as a ruthless assault on the integrity of the judiciary, Dlamini declared on November 28, 2002 that the Government of His Majesty would not respect the Court of Appeal judgements relating to three cases – the Non-Bailable Offences Order, the mass eviction of families from Kamkhweli and Macetjeni areas and the committal of senior police officers to imprisonment for contempt of court. In his public address to the nation on November 28, 2002, the former Prime Minister ordered all law enforcement sectors to disobey the Court of Appeals rulings, creating a crisis in the rule of law hitherto unseen in Swaziland's judicial history. All judges of the Court of Appeal resigned in protest against this display of brute political attack on the independence of the judiciary. For two years, Swaziland had no functioning Court of Appeal. Details of these cases can be found in the Amnesty International Report (AFR 55/004/2004) and PUDEMO Report (September 28, 2004).
Clearly, Dlamini is not a suitable candidate for the AU position given his disastrous record in government. This record renders him completely unfit for public office and he should have not been recommended in the first place. Africa, particularly SADC, must be congratulated for its commitment to protecting the AU's integrity by refusing to endorse this tin-pot dictator to take the reins of the organisation.
As an organisation committed to democratic governance and political transparency, we are obliged to expose Dlamini's record and make sure that he is quarantined from international leadership responsibilities. We have an obligation to the people of Africa to protect the integrity of the AU as a forward looking organisation committed to political, economic and social progress. The quality of leaders at the helm of the AU is crucial to achieving the organisation's goals and building its global credibility.
Signed:
Dr. Jabulane Matsebula
PUDEMO Representative
Australia, Asia and the South Pacific Region
Wednesday, July 25, 2007
AISA Presentation
PUDEMO
“Insika Yenkhululeko YeMaswati”
PEOPLE’S UNITED DEMOCRATIC MOVEMENT
P.O.BOX 8389, NELSPRUIT, 1200
PHONE 082 92 31 401.
FAX 013 778 9784.
2007-07-25
AISA PRESENTATION.
THE PATH TO A PEACEFUL RESOLUTION OF THE POLITICAL IMPASSE IN SWAZILAND:
A. BACKGROUND
Since that chilly afternoon of the 13 July 1983, on the banks of the Umbuluzi river some 10kms north-east of Mbabane- hidden by the reeds and over-shadowed by the mighty beauty of the pre-historic Sibebe rock, where fine sons and daughters of the Swazi soil met and formed PUDEMO ; yes since that day PUDEMO has been ready to meet and negotiate the future of our country. We have been ready for the past 24 years for the peaceful resolution of the political impasse in Swaziland . What has changed is the urgency and impatience with which we lust for this noble objective and the now razor sharp clarity of our thoughts as to the processes that must be followed for the transfer of government to the people.
We are not interested in the delaying tactics, and in many useless summits. These have become a specialty for the royal family regime. The royal regime sent their emissaries to meet us when we were part of National Constituent Assembly (NCA) , but their servants had neither agenda nor terms of reference from their masters. From the word go, PUDEMO could see that this is a time wasting exercise. We were criticized by the other parties in the NCA , labeled as rebels and extremists , but at the end the truth was laid bare for all to see . The empty negotiations crumbled , the repressive brutality of the regime was stepped up . Whilst their political darlings Sibahle Sinje (meaning Swaziland is ok as it is) a pseudo-cultural group serving as a training ground for young political servants of the status-qou, had an uninterrupted relaunch of themselves as a political party, our SWAYOCO members were being brutalized by the royal police a spitting distance away from the Sibahle Sinje meeting. We are not interested in meeting the regime for drinking traditional marula (buganu) and cracking jokes like the Ngwane National Limbo Congress (NNLC) that says they will bring change from within. A thousand years of collaboration and soft reprimand will never change the regime. One cannot cross a river on the back of a crocodile.
Now the question that begs to be asked is…. Who shall champion the truth ?!Who shall marshal the agenda of democracy and champion the cause of the poor and downtrodden in Swaziland. No organization can crown itself as the flag bearer of the masses, only the masses can give such a status to an organization.
The only organization that has earned the title of “ the peoples leader” “the peoples vanguard” is none other than PUDEMO. Our historic document “the road map to a new and democratic Swaziland” remains the critical analyses of the political impasse in Swaziland. The road map is not a romantic fantasy, it remains the compass, thermometer and barometer of the path we shall beat as we march to seize power for the people and seek their mandate to govern.
Democracy is like beauty; all people, even ugly ones, want to be told that they are beautiful. If they are not told this, they create praise songs that describe themselves as being beautiful. They create illusions of beauty. Just like all regimes want to be associated with democracy, no matter how undemocratic they are!! Similarly, the royal family regime of Swaziland has become experts in the creation of illusions. These illusions can fool the politically young, the naïve, those who suffer from infantile political diseases like the political measles of tribalism, sexism and narrow nationalism and those who are just too eager to be fooled. As already mentioned:
a. Multi-party democracy
b. Separation of the powers and systems of government
c. An independent judiciary
d. A legitimate bill of rights
e. Accountability and transparency
f. Regular free and fair electionsh.
g. Institutions protecting constitutional democracy
h. Fair and reasonable procedure for amendment
(adapted from OSISA)
2. The so-called negotiations that took place in the recent past were an outright mockery of those who yearn for freedom in our lifetime. Various sectors had called for negotiations and as predicted the government ignored them. (see narrative). When the event of border blockade was announced in April, for the 12th April again the regime accepted to negotiate. Predictable the pre-condition was a withdrawal of the border blockade. PUDEMO did not accept these pre-condition, but unfortunately other components of the NCA did- again mocking us as extremists. But that was just shallow and short-lived opportunism. April 12 blockades came and were a huge success. The fake negotiations were still born.
3. Other such illusions are those of an election; illusions of the rule of law; illusions of the separation of powers and illusions of pliability in the constitution.
B. THE WAY FORWARD-------- A PUDEMO DOCUMENT
1. The Preamble
2. The Preliminary negotiations
These are talks about talks. We are acutely aware to the growing divide and lack of trust amongst the protagonists. So we need a session for finding each other and allaying prejudices and natural fears, ( kutselelana emanti ). More importantly this is where we shall discuss how we shall carry on the business of negotiations. Most importantly this will be the moments where PUDEMO shall seek agreement on the Memorandum of Intent.
3.The Memorandum of Intent
The King must after the preliminary negotiations issue a statement to the nation called the Memorandum of Intent, that as of then, there exists a genuine desire to negotiate the future of our country. He is the person most suited to make this pronouncement, as he remains the single biggest impediment to the peaceful resolution of the political conflict in Swaziland. Inter-alia he shall announce the following:
4. The National Convention
A national convention shall be a forum where-in all political parties, political organizations, labour organizations, youth and women’s organizations, traditional institutions, NGO’s and other interest groups would come together to work out the details of the democratization process and lay down acceptable parameters on the modalities leading to a constituent assembly.
The national convention will constitute and form an interim government, based on proportional representation or some other democratic criteria. The position of the King will be in sharp focus here. The King has unwittingly (despite our age old warnings) allowed himself to be a player, referee, linesman, match official and sporting federation all at the same time in the political football of Swaziland. What will be his position then at this stage? Will he be part of a certain political party/ movement? What if this party losses the first democratic elections? It would be too late for him to take the position of impartial referee at this stage. It is my considered opinion that the King must at the stage of the interim government recluse himself and be led to a place of safety outside Swaziland and a caretaker head of state be appointed; probably an elder statesman of Southern Africa, an AU nominee or similar person of wisdom.
This interim government must be balanced and impartial, with clearly defined functions and limited powers and must ensure fairness without bias in favour of one group and most importantly secure the task of the constituent assembly. It shall have a term not exceeding two years.
An interim government will need an interim set of governance rules and regulations; an interim constitution. The royal expedition constitution of 2005 is a definite no-no. The King Sobhuza proclamation of 1973 will be already in the dustbin of history. I find the 1968 independence constitution also unacceptable, due to it’s many similarities to the current 2005 constitution, especially as it pertains to the powers of the King. Therefore it is my considered opinion that the national convention shall have to come up with an interim constitution, one that will satisfy the relevant parts of the eight point criteria.
4. The Constituent Assembly
Under the guidance of the interim government, a constituent assembly, will be formed and constituted. The constituent assembly would be a body elected by all the people, whose main responsibility is to draw up the new constitution for the democratic Swaziland.
We are at pains to ensure that the democratization process is itself democratic. Only a properly constituted constituent assembly will have the legitimate mandate to carry on the task of creating a new democratic dispensation. The electoral process of the constituent assembly will be defined at the national convention. This dispensation will be inclusive and include the monarchy, as the historic congress of PUDEMO of December 2006 articulated the movement’s desire for a constitutional monarchy.
5. Outcomes
Once the people of Swaziland have adopted a new constitution for Swaziland, the following will result:
Dr Sonke Dlamini
PUDEMO
“Insika Yenkhululeko YeMaswati”
PEOPLE’S UNITED DEMOCRATIC MOVEMENT
OFFICE OF THE CHIEF REPRESENTATIVE
OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY FOR INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRSP.O.BOX 8389, NELSPRUIT, 1200
PHONE 082 92 31 401.
FAX 013 778 9784.
2007-07-25
AISA PRESENTATION.
THE PATH TO A PEACEFUL RESOLUTION OF THE POLITICAL IMPASSE IN SWAZILAND:
A. BACKGROUND
Since that chilly afternoon of the 13 July 1983, on the banks of the Umbuluzi river some 10kms north-east of Mbabane- hidden by the reeds and over-shadowed by the mighty beauty of the pre-historic Sibebe rock, where fine sons and daughters of the Swazi soil met and formed PUDEMO ; yes since that day PUDEMO has been ready to meet and negotiate the future of our country. We have been ready for the past 24 years for the peaceful resolution of the political impasse in Swaziland . What has changed is the urgency and impatience with which we lust for this noble objective and the now razor sharp clarity of our thoughts as to the processes that must be followed for the transfer of government to the people.
We are not interested in the delaying tactics, and in many useless summits. These have become a specialty for the royal family regime. The royal regime sent their emissaries to meet us when we were part of National Constituent Assembly (NCA) , but their servants had neither agenda nor terms of reference from their masters. From the word go, PUDEMO could see that this is a time wasting exercise. We were criticized by the other parties in the NCA , labeled as rebels and extremists , but at the end the truth was laid bare for all to see . The empty negotiations crumbled , the repressive brutality of the regime was stepped up . Whilst their political darlings Sibahle Sinje (meaning Swaziland is ok as it is) a pseudo-cultural group serving as a training ground for young political servants of the status-qou, had an uninterrupted relaunch of themselves as a political party, our SWAYOCO members were being brutalized by the royal police a spitting distance away from the Sibahle Sinje meeting. We are not interested in meeting the regime for drinking traditional marula (buganu) and cracking jokes like the Ngwane National Limbo Congress (NNLC) that says they will bring change from within. A thousand years of collaboration and soft reprimand will never change the regime. One cannot cross a river on the back of a crocodile.
Now the question that begs to be asked is…. Who shall champion the truth ?!Who shall marshal the agenda of democracy and champion the cause of the poor and downtrodden in Swaziland. No organization can crown itself as the flag bearer of the masses, only the masses can give such a status to an organization.
The only organization that has earned the title of “ the peoples leader” “the peoples vanguard” is none other than PUDEMO. Our historic document “the road map to a new and democratic Swaziland” remains the critical analyses of the political impasse in Swaziland. The road map is not a romantic fantasy, it remains the compass, thermometer and barometer of the path we shall beat as we march to seize power for the people and seek their mandate to govern.
Democracy is like beauty; all people, even ugly ones, want to be told that they are beautiful. If they are not told this, they create praise songs that describe themselves as being beautiful. They create illusions of beauty. Just like all regimes want to be associated with democracy, no matter how undemocratic they are!! Similarly, the royal family regime of Swaziland has become experts in the creation of illusions. These illusions can fool the politically young, the naïve, those who suffer from infantile political diseases like the political measles of tribalism, sexism and narrow nationalism and those who are just too eager to be fooled. As already mentioned:
- They create delaying tactics. It took the royal mafia regime almost ten years to create a constitution of just over a million of people in a country of just over 17000 square miles with the largest distance from border to border being under 200 kms. The royal constitution is riddled with contradictions. What it gives with the left-hand it takes away with the right–hand. The preparatory events to the constitution fail the test: It was not inclusive, it was not transparent, it was not participatory and it was not accountable. The constitution itself fails the eight point test; it does not guarantee
a. Multi-party democracy
b. Separation of the powers and systems of government
c. An independent judiciary
d. A legitimate bill of rights
e. Accountability and transparency
f. Regular free and fair electionsh.
g. Institutions protecting constitutional democracy
h. Fair and reasonable procedure for amendment
(adapted from OSISA)
2. The so-called negotiations that took place in the recent past were an outright mockery of those who yearn for freedom in our lifetime. Various sectors had called for negotiations and as predicted the government ignored them. (see narrative). When the event of border blockade was announced in April, for the 12th April again the regime accepted to negotiate. Predictable the pre-condition was a withdrawal of the border blockade. PUDEMO did not accept these pre-condition, but unfortunately other components of the NCA did- again mocking us as extremists. But that was just shallow and short-lived opportunism. April 12 blockades came and were a huge success. The fake negotiations were still born.
3. Other such illusions are those of an election; illusions of the rule of law; illusions of the separation of powers and illusions of pliability in the constitution.
B. THE WAY FORWARD-------- A PUDEMO DOCUMENT
1. The Preamble
2. The Preliminary negotiations
These are talks about talks. We are acutely aware to the growing divide and lack of trust amongst the protagonists. So we need a session for finding each other and allaying prejudices and natural fears, ( kutselelana emanti ). More importantly this is where we shall discuss how we shall carry on the business of negotiations. Most importantly this will be the moments where PUDEMO shall seek agreement on the Memorandum of Intent.
3.The Memorandum of Intent
The King must after the preliminary negotiations issue a statement to the nation called the Memorandum of Intent, that as of then, there exists a genuine desire to negotiate the future of our country. He is the person most suited to make this pronouncement, as he remains the single biggest impediment to the peaceful resolution of the political conflict in Swaziland. Inter-alia he shall announce the following:
- The unbanning of political parties. The truth is that political parties remain banned in Swaziland (see Hilary’s letter). Only conservative parties are allowed to operate albeit unofficially. Political parties were expressly banned in 1973 and therefore it stands only to reason if not anything else that they should be officially expressly unbanned. The International Bar Association on their critique to the current royal constitution further stressed this point.
- Create instruments for political parties to operate e.g. a registering office, a framework of registration regulations and possible financial resources for at least the major political players already in existence at the time.
- Pronounce on the unconditional return and indemnification of all political exiles.
- Make a specific pronouncement on the freedom of association as in section 25 of the royal constitution this freedom is deliberately vague and the onus of this freedom is placed on the royal police commissioner (see Hilary’s letter). The right to association, assembly and freedom of speech must be clearly re-pronounced. And that these freedoms shall be enjoyed without undue pressure and threat from the police save for the maintainance of legitimate politically neutral law and order.
- Depending on the character of the conflict at that stage, the MoI may include a ceasefire agreement.
- The MoI must of necessity be a legal document, agreed to by all parties especially the major adversaries PUDEMO and the royal mafia regime, and must have clear time frames for implementation of the next crucial step – the national convention.
4. The National Convention
A national convention shall be a forum where-in all political parties, political organizations, labour organizations, youth and women’s organizations, traditional institutions, NGO’s and other interest groups would come together to work out the details of the democratization process and lay down acceptable parameters on the modalities leading to a constituent assembly.
The national convention will constitute and form an interim government, based on proportional representation or some other democratic criteria. The position of the King will be in sharp focus here. The King has unwittingly (despite our age old warnings) allowed himself to be a player, referee, linesman, match official and sporting federation all at the same time in the political football of Swaziland. What will be his position then at this stage? Will he be part of a certain political party/ movement? What if this party losses the first democratic elections? It would be too late for him to take the position of impartial referee at this stage. It is my considered opinion that the King must at the stage of the interim government recluse himself and be led to a place of safety outside Swaziland and a caretaker head of state be appointed; probably an elder statesman of Southern Africa, an AU nominee or similar person of wisdom.
This interim government must be balanced and impartial, with clearly defined functions and limited powers and must ensure fairness without bias in favour of one group and most importantly secure the task of the constituent assembly. It shall have a term not exceeding two years.
An interim government will need an interim set of governance rules and regulations; an interim constitution. The royal expedition constitution of 2005 is a definite no-no. The King Sobhuza proclamation of 1973 will be already in the dustbin of history. I find the 1968 independence constitution also unacceptable, due to it’s many similarities to the current 2005 constitution, especially as it pertains to the powers of the King. Therefore it is my considered opinion that the national convention shall have to come up with an interim constitution, one that will satisfy the relevant parts of the eight point criteria.
4. The Constituent Assembly
Under the guidance of the interim government, a constituent assembly, will be formed and constituted. The constituent assembly would be a body elected by all the people, whose main responsibility is to draw up the new constitution for the democratic Swaziland.
We are at pains to ensure that the democratization process is itself democratic. Only a properly constituted constituent assembly will have the legitimate mandate to carry on the task of creating a new democratic dispensation. The electoral process of the constituent assembly will be defined at the national convention. This dispensation will be inclusive and include the monarchy, as the historic congress of PUDEMO of December 2006 articulated the movement’s desire for a constitutional monarchy.
5. Outcomes
Once the people of Swaziland have adopted a new constitution for Swaziland, the following will result:
- The dissolution of the constituent assembly.
- Elections for a democratic legislature, of the people, by the people and for the people in a multi party democracy.
- Repeal of all previous constitutions,proclamations, amendments and the like.
- The formation of a new government, filling the other arms of government i.e. the executive and the judiciary.
- The dissolution of the interim government.
Dr Sonke Dlamini
PUDEMO
Thursday, June 14, 2007
PUDEMO President address to the EU delegation
People’s United Democratic Movement - Swaziland
The people of Swaziland are Speaking
…….Is the world listening?
Address to the EU delegation on the 14th June 2007 in Mbabane, Swaziland
PUDEMO since its inception in 1983 has always made it clear that, “the pride of our sovereignty is the guaranteed respect of the will of the people” (People’s manifesto of PUDEMO). This principally means that the process of developing a legitimate national constitution can only come about as a result of a consciously inclusive, participatory and popular process. There can be no substitute for the people, because history has proven that no outcome can be sustainable unless the people themselves have determined it.
We have also watched in dismay, the cold or at best lukewarm attitude of the international community towards Swaziland, though we do appreciate the efforts from certain quarters of the international community to really pay attention to the long-standing demands and concerns of the people of Swaziland. However, there are those sectors within the international community who have chosen to stand, openly, on the side of the regime and its attempts to impose undemocratic processes down the throats of the Swazi people, key amongst them is the commonwealth.
However, we take comfort in the knowledge that the world community of civilised people are fully behind us, key amongst them are the mass of the people of South Africa under the leadership of the tripartite alliance, who have stood by us even in the midst of insults and false accusations by the royal family regime and its patrons. We salute them and vw never to let down their genuine support for democracy and people-centred development in the whole continent, Swaziland included.
Finally, we are proud of our record and consistent struggles with the full support of all Swazi patriots who have refused to be massaged by the evil system. Towards this end, we are also very proud that we have clarified our wayforward as profoundly articulated by the popular Road Map towards a new and democratic Swaziland programme of the movement adopted by the 6th General Congress recently.
We are confident that we have demonstrated without apology our profound commitment to a practical and lasting solution to the crisis facing our country. We have clarified the route from the situation of today and the struggles we seek to wage, to the transition process towards the creation of a new and democratic society, with the core elements of the new society we are struggling to build, being firmly put in place. None can ever doubt PUDEMO’s proven commitment to a real, sustainable and legitimate solution to the problems tinkhundla has plunged our country into.
We seek no short-cuts that will be reversible or avoid the foundation of the problem, but at the same time, we seek to do all within our powers to bring about a speedy solution that is inclusive, sustainable and democratic, yet anchored in fundamentally progressive traditions that civilised humanity has yet evolved.
The Swazi economy is at a serious crisis point and drastic measures are required to save it from ultimate collapse. Growth rate indicators point to a bleak situation as unemployment, poverty, skills and brain drain, rates of investment and general returns on investment are always pointing to a bleak picture. PUDEMO is working on a framework to begin engaging the process of how to return our economy to its rightful place, but not in isolation to, but as part of the general effort to make our country viable in all ways possible, ranging from political governance to economic performance.
Generation after generation have been subjected to the most vicious form of institutionalised subjugation. This explains why despite the massive and simmering anger, people are still sceptical of taking direct action to attack the evil system from its roots, all sorts of excuses and reasons are being put forward for lack of action. However, part of the blame should be apportioned to us as the progressive movement, surely, we could do more to organise the masses of the people to take action now. This is not to undermine the extent to which we are also facing a well-armed and finally well-resourced system, with no or bare minimum resources.
This, we believe is related to the point of the fact that the international community has not yet demonstrated their practical commitment to supporting the seeds of democracy in our country and nurturing the institutionalisation of a culture of organisation, mass participation and vibrant engagement.
On the political front, we have noted a deliberate attempt to downplay the extent of the crisis in the country by the ruling regime, with the full support of some sectors of the international community and media. They have under-recorded the significance of the numerous arrests, mass activities against the state, political statements against the regime and all the efforts of the people to expose the rottenness of the system and begin the road to a new and better society.
Most recently, we have also noted the regime’s political games to fool the world and the people through its negotiations and dialogue projects that are only meant to create an impression of engagement and open space for inclusivity in the political life of the system. It is also an attempt to buy time and renew the system’s lease of life. We have stated very clearly that the necessary climate for negotiations must be created before any meaningful process can begin. We believe that the onus is on the shoulders of the regime, they must prove they are now serious about the process of creating the necessary climate and momentum for change. The Road Map had this to say, “The removal of all laws that prohibit free political activity and the unbanning of political parties in Swaziland shall constitute a strategic victory for the movement, leading to the creation of political conditions which shall make it possible to pursue the objectives of the transfer of political power to the people through negotiations”.
We are convinced that the conditions in the country do not facilitate proper dialogue, in fact, they militate against negotiations, turning every claim to negotiations under the present climate into a joke or mockery, if not an outright insult to the dignity of the people. Our honest commitment to negotiations does not mean it should be at any cost to the interests of our people and the cause for their liberation. We are as much committed to negotiations as we are to finding a lasting solution to the problems of our country, therefore, we shall not allow ourselves to be drowned in the couldron of political confusion and desperate measures in order to divert us from our core mission – to liberate our people and speedily turn the country into a democratic society.
We have maintained that the constitution entrenches royal supremacy, particularly the consolidation of the monarchy’s hold onto power. It negates the essence of an advance towards democracy, which therefore requires all our condemnation and rejection. But beyond rejections, we need to build and support the momentum towards an alternative process underpinned by inclusivity and legitimacy. We do believe that it is not too late for a genuine alternative process towards a lasting solution to the constitutional crisis we face. We want to maintain that we shall not and have been part of the regime’s cosmetic dialogue, because we believe we have a sacred duty to our people, which is to preserve the dignity of our struggle and restore the confidence of the people in the movement and the cause for democracy itself. We shall not betray them, whatever the odds.
The intensified arrests of our members and activists indicate the growing intransigence and arrogance of the royal regime and calls for intensified political action and international focus on Swaziland. The recent border blockade brutality and the on-going attack on our movement, with the most deafening silence on the part of the international community says volumes about the character of the international community and we are sure, this meeting should mark a new era in how the international community responds to the urgencies arising out of the crisis in our country and beyond.
We call for the unconditional release of all our comrades who are on bail, the creation of conducive conditions for the unconditional return of our exiles and the immediate cessation of all political hostilities, with the security forces behaving as a professional, rather than the private royal army that they are.
The issue at hand is a multiparty democracy and the creation of sufficient political space for all our people to participate with all the rights and responsibilities that all civilised beings enjoy everywhere in the world. But multiparty on its own will not resolve the decades long crisis, which means it should only serve as a space for the intensification of a national effort against all the ills afflicting our society, poverty in particular. The regime is preparing for elections to be held under the directives of the royal constitution and under the current conditions that militate against the free and full participation of all the people and we expect that the EU will be forthright in its condemnation of this abominable act.
SADC protocol, AU and NEPAD provisions, the Harare Declaration of the Commonwealth and several other international instruments call for multiparty democracy and adequate pluralistic space for the full and effective participation of all people as a necessary condition for sustainable and legitimate electoral systems and the deepening of democracy in Africa. It is in this context that we are surprised by the behaviour of the Commonwealth that has assisted the regime to draft a constitution that bars political parties and free political activity in the name of culture, we condemn this act of hypocrisy with all the energies at our disposal. We call upon all these multilateral institutions to enforce their conventions in defence of the dignity of our people and their own dignity as institutions, whose relevance to the people of Africa is yet to be affirmed in many instances.
We are glad to realise the amount of interest and enthusiasm it has generated throughout the length and breadth of our society, in particularly amongst all progressive organisations and patriots of our beloved country. We have dedicated significant energy and time to this noble effort and we hope with the momentum already generated, we are not turning back, but are looking forward to a new impetus on the Swazi political front.
There are basic fundamentals required to generate and sustain the momentum towards a genuine and legitimate alternative to the deepening crisis in our country;
However, we need to make it clear in no uncertain terms that we do believe the EU can do more to assist the people of Swaziland than it has been so far willing to do. The most immediate task that we would like to put forward to you in firmer terms is the issue of smart sanctions against the Mswati regime, particularly the royal family as clearly articulated in our 6th National Congress document, entitled, “Targeted sanctions against the ruling regime of Swaziland”. Towards this end, we specifically call upon you to ensure that in the coming EU-AU summit in Portugal in October, the Swazi regime is not invited, as is the case with other non-complying states where you have openly pronounced yourselves. We shall be glad to work with you, as well as measure your renewed commitment and determination to take Swaziland on a new road to sustainable change through this very small and humble quest on our side.
In all these, the international community shall be expected to support in all possible ways, the efforts of the Swazi people to create a new society. This requires more than just political and moral support, but essentially, material and financial support too. If political parties are the key elements of any democratic society, then they must be prepared and supported to play their part effectively. They must be capacitated to fully undertake their historic assignments of mobilising the people to act as their own liberators and custodians of their own destiny. We are alive to the reality that not all political parties represent the future of the country, some represent the past and the very essence of the current system in crisis, which indicates the fact that even the political parties themselves will not necessarily have a smooth sailing, but will have their own challenges to address about the kind of society we are struggling to build.
However, we do believe that the Swazi regime has been let off the international human rights radar for far too long and the international community is guilty for that. It has pretended not to see what is happening in this country and has remained silent in the midst of conspicuous degeneration and royal shame. We cannot allow that any more, we commit to play our own part, but also call upon the world community of democracy loving people to play theirs fully.
We also take this opportunity to warn that patience is desirable, but patience has a limit and would not want to be accused of having not warned that time is not on our side, our people’s suffering is daily becoming a threat to national security, if we seek to use the words of the regime. But in our own view, it is a threat to the selfish desires of the royal family.
Swaziland is the only country we have and would like to see the best come out of it, however, we are worried by the attitude displayed by the regime and the lack of urgency in attending to matters of national interest.
We have always affirmed that we are ready and willing to enter into serious dialogue with the regime, but only once the proper conditions are created and that is the challenge we are putting on the doorstep of the regime. It is not too late to save our country, but it is too late to entertain delaying tactics.
The people of Swaziland are Speaking
…….Is the world listening?
Mario Masuku – PUDEMO President
Address to the EU delegation on the 14th June 2007 in Mbabane, Swaziland
Introduction
In the past few days the world was made to observe the consolidation of royal monopoly over power in the country through a royal constitutional process, which was exclusively designed by the royal regime to serve its narrow undemocratic interests and in the process, exclude the rest of the people in such an important national process.PUDEMO since its inception in 1983 has always made it clear that, “the pride of our sovereignty is the guaranteed respect of the will of the people” (People’s manifesto of PUDEMO). This principally means that the process of developing a legitimate national constitution can only come about as a result of a consciously inclusive, participatory and popular process. There can be no substitute for the people, because history has proven that no outcome can be sustainable unless the people themselves have determined it.
We have also watched in dismay, the cold or at best lukewarm attitude of the international community towards Swaziland, though we do appreciate the efforts from certain quarters of the international community to really pay attention to the long-standing demands and concerns of the people of Swaziland. However, there are those sectors within the international community who have chosen to stand, openly, on the side of the regime and its attempts to impose undemocratic processes down the throats of the Swazi people, key amongst them is the commonwealth.
However, we take comfort in the knowledge that the world community of civilised people are fully behind us, key amongst them are the mass of the people of South Africa under the leadership of the tripartite alliance, who have stood by us even in the midst of insults and false accusations by the royal family regime and its patrons. We salute them and vw never to let down their genuine support for democracy and people-centred development in the whole continent, Swaziland included.
Finally, we are proud of our record and consistent struggles with the full support of all Swazi patriots who have refused to be massaged by the evil system. Towards this end, we are also very proud that we have clarified our wayforward as profoundly articulated by the popular Road Map towards a new and democratic Swaziland programme of the movement adopted by the 6th General Congress recently.
We are confident that we have demonstrated without apology our profound commitment to a practical and lasting solution to the crisis facing our country. We have clarified the route from the situation of today and the struggles we seek to wage, to the transition process towards the creation of a new and democratic society, with the core elements of the new society we are struggling to build, being firmly put in place. None can ever doubt PUDEMO’s proven commitment to a real, sustainable and legitimate solution to the problems tinkhundla has plunged our country into.
We seek no short-cuts that will be reversible or avoid the foundation of the problem, but at the same time, we seek to do all within our powers to bring about a speedy solution that is inclusive, sustainable and democratic, yet anchored in fundamentally progressive traditions that civilised humanity has yet evolved.
The situation in Swaziland today
Our country is facing a deep-seated structural crisis. It al an all-round crisis that afflicts every sphere of our society. The demon of royal supremacy and the hegemony of a corrupted and bankrupt morality permeates every part of our life. It has become so normal to be corrupt that anyone questioning it, instantly has his/her mental state questioned. What kind of a society fears to challenge such terrifying levels of corruption, women and children abuse, soaring unemployment and grinding poverty levels.The Swazi economy is at a serious crisis point and drastic measures are required to save it from ultimate collapse. Growth rate indicators point to a bleak situation as unemployment, poverty, skills and brain drain, rates of investment and general returns on investment are always pointing to a bleak picture. PUDEMO is working on a framework to begin engaging the process of how to return our economy to its rightful place, but not in isolation to, but as part of the general effort to make our country viable in all ways possible, ranging from political governance to economic performance.
Generation after generation have been subjected to the most vicious form of institutionalised subjugation. This explains why despite the massive and simmering anger, people are still sceptical of taking direct action to attack the evil system from its roots, all sorts of excuses and reasons are being put forward for lack of action. However, part of the blame should be apportioned to us as the progressive movement, surely, we could do more to organise the masses of the people to take action now. This is not to undermine the extent to which we are also facing a well-armed and finally well-resourced system, with no or bare minimum resources.
This, we believe is related to the point of the fact that the international community has not yet demonstrated their practical commitment to supporting the seeds of democracy in our country and nurturing the institutionalisation of a culture of organisation, mass participation and vibrant engagement.
On the political front, we have noted a deliberate attempt to downplay the extent of the crisis in the country by the ruling regime, with the full support of some sectors of the international community and media. They have under-recorded the significance of the numerous arrests, mass activities against the state, political statements against the regime and all the efforts of the people to expose the rottenness of the system and begin the road to a new and better society.
Most recently, we have also noted the regime’s political games to fool the world and the people through its negotiations and dialogue projects that are only meant to create an impression of engagement and open space for inclusivity in the political life of the system. It is also an attempt to buy time and renew the system’s lease of life. We have stated very clearly that the necessary climate for negotiations must be created before any meaningful process can begin. We believe that the onus is on the shoulders of the regime, they must prove they are now serious about the process of creating the necessary climate and momentum for change. The Road Map had this to say, “The removal of all laws that prohibit free political activity and the unbanning of political parties in Swaziland shall constitute a strategic victory for the movement, leading to the creation of political conditions which shall make it possible to pursue the objectives of the transfer of political power to the people through negotiations”.
We are convinced that the conditions in the country do not facilitate proper dialogue, in fact, they militate against negotiations, turning every claim to negotiations under the present climate into a joke or mockery, if not an outright insult to the dignity of the people. Our honest commitment to negotiations does not mean it should be at any cost to the interests of our people and the cause for their liberation. We are as much committed to negotiations as we are to finding a lasting solution to the problems of our country, therefore, we shall not allow ourselves to be drowned in the couldron of political confusion and desperate measures in order to divert us from our core mission – to liberate our people and speedily turn the country into a democratic society.
We have maintained that the constitution entrenches royal supremacy, particularly the consolidation of the monarchy’s hold onto power. It negates the essence of an advance towards democracy, which therefore requires all our condemnation and rejection. But beyond rejections, we need to build and support the momentum towards an alternative process underpinned by inclusivity and legitimacy. We do believe that it is not too late for a genuine alternative process towards a lasting solution to the constitutional crisis we face. We want to maintain that we shall not and have been part of the regime’s cosmetic dialogue, because we believe we have a sacred duty to our people, which is to preserve the dignity of our struggle and restore the confidence of the people in the movement and the cause for democracy itself. We shall not betray them, whatever the odds.
The intensified arrests of our members and activists indicate the growing intransigence and arrogance of the royal regime and calls for intensified political action and international focus on Swaziland. The recent border blockade brutality and the on-going attack on our movement, with the most deafening silence on the part of the international community says volumes about the character of the international community and we are sure, this meeting should mark a new era in how the international community responds to the urgencies arising out of the crisis in our country and beyond.
We call for the unconditional release of all our comrades who are on bail, the creation of conducive conditions for the unconditional return of our exiles and the immediate cessation of all political hostilities, with the security forces behaving as a professional, rather than the private royal army that they are.
The issue at hand is a multiparty democracy and the creation of sufficient political space for all our people to participate with all the rights and responsibilities that all civilised beings enjoy everywhere in the world. But multiparty on its own will not resolve the decades long crisis, which means it should only serve as a space for the intensification of a national effort against all the ills afflicting our society, poverty in particular. The regime is preparing for elections to be held under the directives of the royal constitution and under the current conditions that militate against the free and full participation of all the people and we expect that the EU will be forthright in its condemnation of this abominable act.
SADC protocol, AU and NEPAD provisions, the Harare Declaration of the Commonwealth and several other international instruments call for multiparty democracy and adequate pluralistic space for the full and effective participation of all people as a necessary condition for sustainable and legitimate electoral systems and the deepening of democracy in Africa. It is in this context that we are surprised by the behaviour of the Commonwealth that has assisted the regime to draft a constitution that bars political parties and free political activity in the name of culture, we condemn this act of hypocrisy with all the energies at our disposal. We call upon all these multilateral institutions to enforce their conventions in defence of the dignity of our people and their own dignity as institutions, whose relevance to the people of Africa is yet to be affirmed in many instances.
On the Road to a new and democratic Swaziland - the future belongs to the people!
In our 6th National Congress we boldly proclaimed our profound commitment to the unity of all progressive forces in Swaziland and we saw ourselves as key, yet humble players in forging close working ties with our comrades and patriots in the mass democratic movement towards what Congress called the National Democratic Front.We are glad to realise the amount of interest and enthusiasm it has generated throughout the length and breadth of our society, in particularly amongst all progressive organisations and patriots of our beloved country. We have dedicated significant energy and time to this noble effort and we hope with the momentum already generated, we are not turning back, but are looking forward to a new impetus on the Swazi political front.
There are basic fundamentals required to generate and sustain the momentum towards a genuine and legitimate alternative to the deepening crisis in our country;
- Support for the efforts of civil society towards a National Democratic Front which shall be the collective expression of all the oppressed and their united desire to build a new and democratic society
- A preliminary engagement process between the state and organs of civil society, particularly political parties to lay the basis for a broad and all-inclusive process of negotiations. This shall also clear all obstacles to real negotiations and remove all impediments towards that end. International multilateral instruments to safeguard it from the regime’s attack and diversion must leverage this process.
- The creation of a legitimate, popular and progressive constitution with the full participation of all stakeholders, in conditions conducive to the process, which could be a product of the above process of broad engagement
However, we need to make it clear in no uncertain terms that we do believe the EU can do more to assist the people of Swaziland than it has been so far willing to do. The most immediate task that we would like to put forward to you in firmer terms is the issue of smart sanctions against the Mswati regime, particularly the royal family as clearly articulated in our 6th National Congress document, entitled, “Targeted sanctions against the ruling regime of Swaziland”. Towards this end, we specifically call upon you to ensure that in the coming EU-AU summit in Portugal in October, the Swazi regime is not invited, as is the case with other non-complying states where you have openly pronounced yourselves. We shall be glad to work with you, as well as measure your renewed commitment and determination to take Swaziland on a new road to sustainable change through this very small and humble quest on our side.
In all these, the international community shall be expected to support in all possible ways, the efforts of the Swazi people to create a new society. This requires more than just political and moral support, but essentially, material and financial support too. If political parties are the key elements of any democratic society, then they must be prepared and supported to play their part effectively. They must be capacitated to fully undertake their historic assignments of mobilising the people to act as their own liberators and custodians of their own destiny. We are alive to the reality that not all political parties represent the future of the country, some represent the past and the very essence of the current system in crisis, which indicates the fact that even the political parties themselves will not necessarily have a smooth sailing, but will have their own challenges to address about the kind of society we are struggling to build.
However, we do believe that the Swazi regime has been let off the international human rights radar for far too long and the international community is guilty for that. It has pretended not to see what is happening in this country and has remained silent in the midst of conspicuous degeneration and royal shame. We cannot allow that any more, we commit to play our own part, but also call upon the world community of democracy loving people to play theirs fully.
Conclusion
We take this opportunity to appreciate the opportunity to reflect on the challenges we face with yourselves and would be glad to count on you as our partners in the winding, yet determined march to democracy in Swaziland.We also take this opportunity to warn that patience is desirable, but patience has a limit and would not want to be accused of having not warned that time is not on our side, our people’s suffering is daily becoming a threat to national security, if we seek to use the words of the regime. But in our own view, it is a threat to the selfish desires of the royal family.
Swaziland is the only country we have and would like to see the best come out of it, however, we are worried by the attitude displayed by the regime and the lack of urgency in attending to matters of national interest.
We have always affirmed that we are ready and willing to enter into serious dialogue with the regime, but only once the proper conditions are created and that is the challenge we are putting on the doorstep of the regime. It is not too late to save our country, but it is too late to entertain delaying tactics.
Wednesday, April 25, 2007
PUDEMO STATEMENT The Silence Brutality in Southern Africa- Sedition Trialists Update
The Silence Brutality in Southern Africa- Sedition Trialists Update
To all friends and comrades
As today is a public holiday in Swaziland the latest sedition 6 news might take a while to get out
Yesterday at Siteki magistrate court the state withdrew sedition charges against 5 of the trialists. These 5 were simply re-charged with violation of simple traffic laws (jaywalking) after spending 2 weeks in jail. This is acute abuse of state power
For convenience and to get out of jail the Comrades decided to plead guilty to these traffic charges (even though when they were arrested they were nowhere near a major road). They were duly sentenced to R 200 fines each or 3 months in prison all wholly suspended for 2 years. They were therefore released and spent the night at their homes. The suspended sentences are strategic for the state because it means the comrades are not likely to want to participate in our peaceful rallies/protests for the next 2 years as they could be charged with traffic offences again and get into complications
Only Comrade Sicelo Vilane remains charged with sedition and after 2 weeks his bail application has still not been heard by the courts. This is another example of state brutalization of political prisoners in Swaziland
You will remember that Comrade Sicelo is the one who was severely tortured by the state during the last treason arrests in 2005/6. They tried to make him a state witness but failed. We eventually applied in the high court and got a restraining order against the police and DPP and only then was he left alone after about 5 periods of extended torture. As a result of the torture he suffered extensive damage to his ears and we had booked him for an operation at Good Shepered Hospital at Siteki on the 18th April 2007. Of coarse he was arrested on the 12th April so this operation had to be cancelled. We believe that the state is still victimizing him because of his refusal to testify for it hence the reluctance to release him with everyone else
For more information contact
Sphasha Dlamini- PUDEMO General Secretary
+268 608 9783
Monday, April 16, 2007
PUDEMO STATEMENT Swaziland police attempt to murder political activist in public
Date: April 16, 2007
Swaziland police attempt to murder political activist in public
The April 13, 2007 issue of the Times of Swaziland published a horrific image of Swaziland police strangling a peaceful political protester. Five armed police officers pounced on the protester lifting his body into mid-air whilst one of the officers strangled him. In the picture, the protester is seen helplessly trying to ease the police officer's grip on his throat. As shocking as this image may be to the international community, the people of Swaziland are exposed to this kind of political violence and gross violation of human rights on a daily basis.
The strangling of the protester occurred during the commemoration of the death of democracy on April 12, 1973 when the late King Sobhuza II, through the King's Proclamation to the nation, declared himself an absolute monarch. On April 12, 2007, PUDEMO organised a peaceful border blockade in protest against the continued effects of this Proclamation, notably the ban on political parties. The event was supported by the South African-based Swaziland Solidarity Network (SSN), the Congress of South African Trade Unions (COSATU) and The South African Communist Party (SACP). Whilst the South African police assisted the peaceful protest on the South African side of the border, the Swaziland police preferred violence.
PUDEMO calls upon the international community to condemn this contemptuous display of sadistic rage by the Swaziland police. There is no other explanation of the conduct of the police other than an attempt to murder the protester by strangling him. The use of such a dangerous stranglehold is a criminal act and the police officer should be charged with attempted murder. His colleagues should be charged as accomplices to attempted murder.
It is now beyond doubt that police violence against unarmed Swazi citizens has reached extreme levels. When the police adopt extreme measures that threaten human life in an attempt to silence opposing voices, there is little hope for the future. Often these measures are characteristics of a failing state and a corrupt political regime that has invested so much in maintaining its stranglehold on political power. As is clearly demonstrated in contemporary Zimbabwean politics, such investment has great human cost. Like Zimbabwe, Swaziland has invested significant time and resources to training killer police to keep the royal family in government. Since 1973, institutionalised violence against citizens has been the hallmark of the policing culture in Swaziland. The signing into law in 2005 of the so-called constitution has had no effect on this culture. Policing of state critics is still heavily influenced by the repressive tradition established by the King's Proclamation of 1973.
Claims that the Constitution Act of 2005 repealed the 1973 Proclamation amount to pure hogwash. In its April 13, 2007 commentary, the Times of Swaziland refers to the 1973 Proclamation as a "repealed" law but there is no reference to the legal instrument that repealed the Proclamation. The Proclamation has not been formally abrogated but it is generally assumed that it has been invalidated because it is not "consistent" with the Constitution Act of 2005. However, the consistency of the Proclamation with the 2005 Act is yet to be tested in the courts. By his own admission, the Attorney General told a delegation from the International Labour Organisation in June 2006 that the Proclamation has not been repealed.
PUDEMO has consistently pointed out that the Proclamation is indeed consistent with the Act of 2005 in many respects. The ban on political parties and the concentration of legislative and executive powers in the hands of the king appear in both laws. Section 15(4) is one of the disturbing aspects of the 2005 Act, which must be seen as a reproduction of the violent police culture established under the 1973 Proclamation. This section permits the killing of citizens for purposes of crime prevention, arrest and suppression of riots. This Section is inconsistent with Article 2(2) of United Nations Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment which states:
No exceptional circumstances whatsoever, whether a state of war or a threat of war, internal political in stability or any other public emergency, may be invoked as a justification of torture.
Swaziland is State Party to the United Nations Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. Section 18(2) of the 2005 Act prohibits the subjugation of individuals "...to torture or inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment", yet Section 15(4) provides a window of opportunity for violent policing practices. The strangling of the peaceful protestor is cruel, inhumane and degrading. It contravenes both the UN Convention on Torture and regime's own constitution law. In response to public outrage, the police are already trying to justify this despicable practice in terms of Section 15(4).
Even given the existence of Section 15(4), any attempts by the police to justify the strangulation of the protester are completely unacceptable. The images clearly show that the protester was being held by five police officers. He was part of a peaceful protest and therefore not presenting a threat to anyone or to property. He was merely expressing his political opinion. Furthermore, one assumes that FIVE burly police officers are sufficient to make a civilised arrest without the need for strangulation. Therefore, there are absolutely no grounds for the police to justify their behaviour even under the provisions of Section 15 (4).
Mass arrest and sedition charges for peaceful protest
In addition to the attempted murder, the police arrested more than ten pro-democracy activists for participating in a peaceful protest during the border blockade. The activists have been charged with sedition after they were found in possession of pamphlets and placards demanding political change. Some of the detainees are still awaiting trial for treason after they were falsely accused of firebombing government property. Recently, one of the detainees, Mpandlana Shongwe, was savagely beaten by police at the Manzini police station until he was unconscious. Shongwe sustained serious injuries including broken ribs.
For several years the People's United Democratic Movement (PUDEMO) has cautioned that the Government of Swaziland is using the new Constitution as a Trojan Horse with the intention of increasing its violent political repression. Through the Constitution, the royal family masquerades as a benign dictator with no real political power. However, the truth is that King Mswati III is not a benign dictator but a malign dictator who rules Swaziland with an iron fist. The Constitution is not, as the regime and the Commonwealth Secretariat claim, a peace offering but an insidious document with great potential to harm our people. Those who placed much hope in the Constitution Act of 2005 must now hang their heads in shame for colluding with King Mswati III's attempt to hide the repression. Among these, is the Commonwealth Secretariat and sections of local media, mainly the royal-family owned The Swazi Observer, who continue to peddle false beliefs that the Constitution protects citizens' rights and freedoms.
PUDEMO reiterates its long-standing position that in the absence of political will among the ruling elite to embrace democracy, the Constitution and its Bill of Rights provision have no meaning and effect. In the absence of political will, the rights and freedoms enshrined in the so-called Bill of Rights will remain empty words with no real meaning. There are strong indications that the government is not at all committed to transforming the Bill of Rights into substantive rights and freedoms by creating the necessary conditions and institutions to allow citizens to exercise these rights. The strangling of the protester, the harassment of PUDEMO members, the arrests and sedition charges all provide unambiguous message that it is business as usual.
We demand the immediate release of all political prisoners and unconditional withdrawal of all charges against our people. PUDEMO will take this fight to the South African Development Community (SADC) and the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights. We will continue to voice our disgust about this sadistic regime until we are heard. They can arrest us and strangle us to death but we will never give up the fight for our rights and freedoms.
Signed:
Dr. Jabulane Matsebula
PUDEMO Representative
Australia, Asia and the South Pacific Region
Swaziland police attempt to murder political activist in public
The April 13, 2007 issue of the Times of Swaziland published a horrific image of Swaziland police strangling a peaceful political protester. Five armed police officers pounced on the protester lifting his body into mid-air whilst one of the officers strangled him. In the picture, the protester is seen helplessly trying to ease the police officer's grip on his throat. As shocking as this image may be to the international community, the people of Swaziland are exposed to this kind of political violence and gross violation of human rights on a daily basis.
The strangling of the protester occurred during the commemoration of the death of democracy on April 12, 1973 when the late King Sobhuza II, through the King's Proclamation to the nation, declared himself an absolute monarch. On April 12, 2007, PUDEMO organised a peaceful border blockade in protest against the continued effects of this Proclamation, notably the ban on political parties. The event was supported by the South African-based Swaziland Solidarity Network (SSN), the Congress of South African Trade Unions (COSATU) and The South African Communist Party (SACP). Whilst the South African police assisted the peaceful protest on the South African side of the border, the Swaziland police preferred violence.
PUDEMO calls upon the international community to condemn this contemptuous display of sadistic rage by the Swaziland police. There is no other explanation of the conduct of the police other than an attempt to murder the protester by strangling him. The use of such a dangerous stranglehold is a criminal act and the police officer should be charged with attempted murder. His colleagues should be charged as accomplices to attempted murder.
It is now beyond doubt that police violence against unarmed Swazi citizens has reached extreme levels. When the police adopt extreme measures that threaten human life in an attempt to silence opposing voices, there is little hope for the future. Often these measures are characteristics of a failing state and a corrupt political regime that has invested so much in maintaining its stranglehold on political power. As is clearly demonstrated in contemporary Zimbabwean politics, such investment has great human cost. Like Zimbabwe, Swaziland has invested significant time and resources to training killer police to keep the royal family in government. Since 1973, institutionalised violence against citizens has been the hallmark of the policing culture in Swaziland. The signing into law in 2005 of the so-called constitution has had no effect on this culture. Policing of state critics is still heavily influenced by the repressive tradition established by the King's Proclamation of 1973.
Claims that the Constitution Act of 2005 repealed the 1973 Proclamation amount to pure hogwash. In its April 13, 2007 commentary, the Times of Swaziland refers to the 1973 Proclamation as a "repealed" law but there is no reference to the legal instrument that repealed the Proclamation. The Proclamation has not been formally abrogated but it is generally assumed that it has been invalidated because it is not "consistent" with the Constitution Act of 2005. However, the consistency of the Proclamation with the 2005 Act is yet to be tested in the courts. By his own admission, the Attorney General told a delegation from the International Labour Organisation in June 2006 that the Proclamation has not been repealed.
PUDEMO has consistently pointed out that the Proclamation is indeed consistent with the Act of 2005 in many respects. The ban on political parties and the concentration of legislative and executive powers in the hands of the king appear in both laws. Section 15(4) is one of the disturbing aspects of the 2005 Act, which must be seen as a reproduction of the violent police culture established under the 1973 Proclamation. This section permits the killing of citizens for purposes of crime prevention, arrest and suppression of riots. This Section is inconsistent with Article 2(2) of United Nations Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment which states:
No exceptional circumstances whatsoever, whether a state of war or a threat of war, internal political in stability or any other public emergency, may be invoked as a justification of torture.
Swaziland is State Party to the United Nations Convention Against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment. Section 18(2) of the 2005 Act prohibits the subjugation of individuals "...to torture or inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment", yet Section 15(4) provides a window of opportunity for violent policing practices. The strangling of the peaceful protestor is cruel, inhumane and degrading. It contravenes both the UN Convention on Torture and regime's own constitution law. In response to public outrage, the police are already trying to justify this despicable practice in terms of Section 15(4).
Even given the existence of Section 15(4), any attempts by the police to justify the strangulation of the protester are completely unacceptable. The images clearly show that the protester was being held by five police officers. He was part of a peaceful protest and therefore not presenting a threat to anyone or to property. He was merely expressing his political opinion. Furthermore, one assumes that FIVE burly police officers are sufficient to make a civilised arrest without the need for strangulation. Therefore, there are absolutely no grounds for the police to justify their behaviour even under the provisions of Section 15 (4).
Mass arrest and sedition charges for peaceful protest
In addition to the attempted murder, the police arrested more than ten pro-democracy activists for participating in a peaceful protest during the border blockade. The activists have been charged with sedition after they were found in possession of pamphlets and placards demanding political change. Some of the detainees are still awaiting trial for treason after they were falsely accused of firebombing government property. Recently, one of the detainees, Mpandlana Shongwe, was savagely beaten by police at the Manzini police station until he was unconscious. Shongwe sustained serious injuries including broken ribs.
For several years the People's United Democratic Movement (PUDEMO) has cautioned that the Government of Swaziland is using the new Constitution as a Trojan Horse with the intention of increasing its violent political repression. Through the Constitution, the royal family masquerades as a benign dictator with no real political power. However, the truth is that King Mswati III is not a benign dictator but a malign dictator who rules Swaziland with an iron fist. The Constitution is not, as the regime and the Commonwealth Secretariat claim, a peace offering but an insidious document with great potential to harm our people. Those who placed much hope in the Constitution Act of 2005 must now hang their heads in shame for colluding with King Mswati III's attempt to hide the repression. Among these, is the Commonwealth Secretariat and sections of local media, mainly the royal-family owned The Swazi Observer, who continue to peddle false beliefs that the Constitution protects citizens' rights and freedoms.
PUDEMO reiterates its long-standing position that in the absence of political will among the ruling elite to embrace democracy, the Constitution and its Bill of Rights provision have no meaning and effect. In the absence of political will, the rights and freedoms enshrined in the so-called Bill of Rights will remain empty words with no real meaning. There are strong indications that the government is not at all committed to transforming the Bill of Rights into substantive rights and freedoms by creating the necessary conditions and institutions to allow citizens to exercise these rights. The strangling of the protester, the harassment of PUDEMO members, the arrests and sedition charges all provide unambiguous message that it is business as usual.
We demand the immediate release of all political prisoners and unconditional withdrawal of all charges against our people. PUDEMO will take this fight to the South African Development Community (SADC) and the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights. We will continue to voice our disgust about this sadistic regime until we are heard. They can arrest us and strangle us to death but we will never give up the fight for our rights and freedoms.
Signed:
Dr. Jabulane Matsebula
PUDEMO Representative
Australia, Asia and the South Pacific Region
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)