AFRICANEWS

Swaziland

Royal decree seen as setback to Swazi democracy

Press freedom

A decree by King Mswati giving him the power to ban publications he deems offensive has sent international observers into a tizzy, but is not seen so negatively by the average Swazi.

The latest royal decree of Swazi King Mswati III will give sub-Saharan Africa's last absolute monarch the power to ban any publication he deems offensive. Viewed from outside the tiny kingdom of Swaziland, this decree appears to be an authoritarian dictate that muzzles the press and subjugates the judiciary, as well as making absolutely clear that commoners cannot challenge royal proclamations.

But opinion amongst Swazis themselves is mixed. Sympathy is thin for the local press, with its erratic and sensational reporting, while most people recognise a dual system of governance and jurisprudence that leaves royal prerogatives strictly within the hands of the ruling Dlamini clan. Royalty has ruled Swaziland for over four hundred years with remarkable success, if progress is measured by the nation's continued autonomy and retention of its traditions.

Nevertheless, most Swazis were surprised when, without warning, an omnibus proclamation instituting new rules over several aspects of national life was declared.

"It was as if the palace considered every challenge that has been raised against its decisions, and cut them all down with one decree," said Sipho Mahlalela, a human rights attorney in the central commercial town of Manzini.

In May, the government shut down two publications, Swaziland's only monthly news magazine and the kingdom's only weekly newspaper, both of which had offered critical reporting and analysis of palace policy. The newspaper, The Guardian, had an editorial slant so anti-monarchy that ten years ago its staff would have been charged with treason.

The paper went to court to challenge the 1968 law that allowed the Minister of Information to ban publications without providing any reason or method of recourse. King Mswati's decree responded by denying media practitioners the right to go to court after their publications have been banned.

The international diplomatic corps stationed in the kingdom reacted with dismay, and local and regional press organisations such as the Media Institute of Southern Africa condemned the rule as dictatorial. The Guardian newspaper, whose Internet web page was unaffected by the decree because Swaziland has no laws governing the Internet, is more radical than ever.

But the average Swazi on the street feels less affected. "The press is biased in its Western views, and disrespectful," says Maggie Simelane, a seamstress at one of the Matsapha Industrial Site garment factories in Manzini that depend on favourable trade agreements with the U.S. for their sales.

Respect of elders and of the king in particular is central to Swazi culture and self-respect. It annoys many Swazis that gadflies in the press are "disrespecting" the monarchy and advocating Western morals that, some traditionalists claim, are promoting the spread of AIDS in a nation where 25 percent of the population is already infected by the HIV virus. However, tolerance of dissenting views may be required to keep favourable international trade agreements.

The U.S. nearly cut off Swaziland's trade benefits, which allow the country's exports to enter the lucrative U.S. market without paying import taxes, thereby giving them a competitive advantage, after parliament passed an industrial relations bill which the palace had loaded with anti-labour amendments. At the eleventh hour, Prime Minister Sibusiso Dlamini went to Washington with a revised bill, and saved the trade benefits.

The Prime Minister may have to do the same with a modified royal decree after U.S. Ambassador to the country Gregory Johnson blasted the decree in a statement. What the ambassador did not say was that U.S. funds helped launch and sustain the Guardian newspaper, whose stories condemning government policies in unrestrained language so irritated palace officials.

Chief Justice Stanley Sapire, who refused to be dismissed by the minister of justice, although the latter was clearly acting under royal instructions, also challenged the palace. Sapire, whose independent-minded rulings overturned some palace decisions, said King Mswati himself could only sack him, the official appointing authority. The king obliged in his decree, and Sapire has been sent packing.

The decree also forbade legal challenges to the decisions of royal authorities in matters pertaining to the kingdom's traditional life. This section of the decree was a direct response to two chiefs and their subjects who mounted a legal challenge against their evictions from ancestral homes to make way for King Mswati's older brother, the senior prince Maguga Dlamini. Human rights groups condemned the evictions, but many Swazis felt the prince held right by birth and status to a governing position in the disputed area. The palace agreed, and declared an end to legal proceedings on matters involving chieftaincy appointments in the royal decree.

The decree was issued while the ipso facto leader of the opposition forces, Jan Sithole, the secretary general of the Swaziland Federation of Trade Unions, was in Geneva at the annual conference of the International Labour Organisation (ILO). The ILO has been a principal supporter of Swaziland's pro-democracy movement, and has urged U.S. trade organisations to press the American congress to revoke the kingdom's trade privileges if laws considered abusive to human rights and workers rights were not changed.

The new decree gave Sithole a strong argument for continued international monitoring of the kingdom's laws. "There are certain norms of behaviour that have to be observed by everyone," he said. "On the record, the Swaziland government agrees, because she is signatory to several human rights accords. It is time that government lives up to its word."

In rebuttal, a senior prince and palace councillor who spoke off the record, replied, "We are conforming to our agreements, at our own pace. The Senate has complained Swaziland is being blackmailed by a threat of loss of aid if we do not adopt the ways of developed countries. There has to be sensitivity amongst foreigners that Swaziland's house is managed by its own people."

It would be easy to dismiss the prince's views as coming from someone who benefits from a royal system that provides position and privilege to a few who wish to hold onto their status. But his view is shared by a majority of Swazis who believe their system is best for them.

Banned political parties cannot raise turnouts of more than a few dozen people for anti-government rallies. Mario Masuku, president of the People's United Democratic Front, the most influential of opposition political parties, says people are afraid of arrest for supporting outlawed political activities, and so shun street demonstrations.

A professor of political science at the University of Swaziland responds, "If any people are genuinely committed to government change, they will take to the streets regardless of the odds. From China to apartheid South Africa, oppressed people have risen up to face the odds. Swazis are not cowards. They just don't see the need."

The academician implies that most Swazis do not feel oppressed, which is evident from conversations and sentiments expressed in newspaper letter pages.

"If we are loyal to Mswati, it is because the Swazi kings have saved us from being South Africans," says Hilda Shongwe, a bank executive in Mbabane. For most of the colonial era, it was assumed that the British protectorate of Swaziland would be incorporated into South Africa, as two-thirds of Swazi territory has already been placed under South African control.

But the diplomacy of long-reigning King Sobhuza, who is generally revered in Swaziland today, prevented it. Unlike virtually all other African tribes, Swazis have retained sacred customs banished from the lives of other peoples by colonial masters, and they have held onto a national identity. Swazis credit the rulers from the House of Dlamini.

However, Swazis regularly express dismay over the actions of palace insiders they feel are misleading the king. The international backlash against the recent sweeping royal decree has resulted in criticism against the law's drafters. Upon his return from a visit to the U.S., King Mswati hinted that he may have relied too heavily on his legal experts before signing the decree, and he intends to review it.

Prime Minister Dlamini set aside two working days, July 12 and 13, to have audiences with diplomats, special interest groups, human rights organizations, and other concerned parties to hear their objections to the decree. At a press conference, he suggested the law was not immutable, and would be adapted to become less draconian.

Once again, Swazi authorities are seeking consensus through compromise. If they do not, the Swazi public's faith that their views are listened to, even without a formal democratic system of government, will be put to the test.

| CONTENTS | AFRICANEWS HOMEPAGE |

AFRICANEWS - Koinonia Media Centre, P.O. Box 21255, Nairobi, Kenya
tel: +254.2.576175 (voice) Fax:- +254.2.577892 (fax-modem)
AFRICANEWS on line is by Koinonia Media Centre