Swaziland Striving For Freedom Vol 14 Apr - Jun 2014

Swaziland:
Striving for
Freedom
As seen through the pages of Swazi Media
Commentary
Volume 14: April to June 2014
[Pick the date]
Swaziland: Striving for Freedom

1

CONTENTS

Introduction 2
1 Nation magazine 3
2 Judicial crisis 17
3 Human rights 20
4 King Mswati and Royal Family 29
5 Media 38
6 Sikhuphe (King Mswati III) Airport 44
7 AGOA 48
8 Economy 53

About the author 55
Books by Swazi Media Commentary 56
Occasional Paper series 57
Swaziland: Striving for Freedom,
previous editions
58


2

INTRODUCTION

The United States has become the first nation to take action against Swaziland over the
kingdoms disregard for human and civil rights. After a lengthy inquiry the US withdrew
Swazilands benefits under the Africa Growth Opportunity Act (AGOA). This means from 1
January 2015 Swaziland will lose the ability to export textile goods to the US without having
to pay tariffs.
While the US was recognising Swazilands failures in human and civil rights an editor and a
human rights lawyer continued to languish in prison on remand as a case against them for
contempt of court crawls through the Swazi High Court. Bheki Makhubu, the editor of the
Nation, a small independent comment magazine, and lawyer and writer Thulani Maseko have
spent more than 100 days in jail. They are accused of writing and publishing articles critical
of the Swazi Chief Justice Michael Ramodibedi. The charges have attracted international
attention which refuses to abate the longer the trial continues.
These are just two of the stories covered by Swazi Media Commentary during the second
quarter of 2014 and now published as part of a collection: Swaziland: Striving for
Freedom, Volume 13.
This publication documents many of the struggles for human rights that are taking place in
the kingdom during March to June 2014. In April, police illegally abducted prodemocracy
leaders and drove them up to 30 kilometres away, before dumping them to prevent them
taking part in a meeting calling for freedom in the kingdom
Seven members of Swazilands best known pro-democracy party the Peoples United
Democratic Movement (PUDEMO) have been arrested and charged under a terrorism act for
wearing t-shirts and berets with the groups name on them.
More than 1,000 people are in jail in Swaziland (nearly three in ten of the entire prison
population) because they are too poor to pay fines.
Meanwhile, an independent survey of attitudes of Swazi people suggested more than six in
ten of them are not satisfied with the way democracy works in the kingdom.
Elsewhere, the E3 billion (US$300 million) Sikhuphe Airport (now renamed King Mswati III
Airport) remains closed to traffic and the public have been banned from visiting the site of
the airport for security reasons.
Swazi Media Commentary has no physical base and is completely independent of any
political faction and receives no income from any individual or organisation. People who
contribute ideas or write for it do so as volunteers and receive no payment.
Swazi Media Commentary is published online updated most days bringing information,
comment and analysis in support of democracy in the kingdom.

3

1. NATION MAGAZINE

Editor is a secret security risk: Govt
2 April 2014

The Swaziland Government says it has to put Bheki Makhubu, the magazine editor charged
with contempt of court, in leg-irons because he is a security risk.

But, it will not say why he is a risk because it is a secret.

There has been an international outcry against the jailing on remand of Makhubu and human
rights lawyer Thulani Maseko. The two men wrote and published articles critical of Swazi
Chief Justice Michael Ramodibedi in the Nation, a monthly magazine with a tiny readership
that circulates in Swaziland, where King Mswati III rules as sub-Saharan Africas last
absolute monarch.
But, the outcry grew louder when it was disclosed that the men were chained in leg-irons
every time they appeared in court. They were arrested on 17 March 2014 and after a series of
court appearances are now remanded until 9 April.
Government spokesperson Sanele Mngotmetulu Nxumalo defended the treatment. It is one
of the things that remain a secret. Security is very secretive. Therefore, if I can disclose to
you when, how, why and to who we use leg irons, that could compromise our security.
Security is very important to us, she said.

Musa Hlophe, the coordinator of the Swaziland Coalition of Concerned Civic Organisations,
who writes a weekly column in the Times Sunday newspaper in Swaziland was one of the
chief critics of the use of leg-irons.
In an article that he wrote for the newspaper, but was not published because the Times feared
reprisals from the state, he wrote, This was the most humiliating, degrading and
embarrassing treatment we, as a country, could subject a decent citizen to.

The embarrassment did not reflect just on the individual we thought we were humiliating,
for whatever reason, but it reflected how barbaric we can be as a nation. While it must be
humiliating to have two prominent law abiding citizens being incarcerated as the two have
been, to put them on leg irons as though they were not only dangerous, but violent common
criminals is totally inexcusable and insulting in the extreme.
He added, What an insult to those Swazis who cherish the ideal of the respect for human
dignity? Section 18 of our Constitution has this to say about protection from inhuman or
degrading treatment: (1) the dignity of every person is inviolable. (2) A person shall not be
subjected to torture or to inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.
Meanwhile, more international organisations have given support to Makhubu and Maseko.
The European Union delegation in Swaziland said the arrests might hamper freedom of
expression and the media in the country. It called on the kingdoms authorities to respect and
promote the freedom of expression in line with Swazilands legislation and international
commitments and obligations.

4

The Right2Know Campaign called for their immediate release and charges to be dropped. It
said the two men had been jailed without trial.
It added their cases were heard in a private court without their lawyers present. So they
were effectively denied a fair trial. Under such conditions, their arrest and detention without a
trial is authoritarian, politically motivated and designed to threaten other journalists who
write critically of the government and of the monarchy.
The Media Institute of Southern Africa reported that Maseko was expected to bring a case
against Chief Justice Michael Ramodibedi. It said Swazi media reported that Maseko would
argue that the Chief Justice did not have the legal power to issue the warrant of arrest,
alleging further that his actions were unconstitutional and irregular.
See also
EDITOR APPEARS IN COURT IN LEG IRONS
CENSORED: CRITICISM OF SWAZI STATE

Judiciary bid to stop media scrutiny
3 April 2014

Swazilands Judicial Service Commission (JSC) has warned people and the media in the
kingdom that they face prosecution if they discuss the case of a magazine editor and a human
rights lawyer jailed on remand for criticising the Swazi Chief Justice.
The Chief Justice is the chair of the JSC, according to the Swaziland Constitution. The other
members are directly appointed by King Mswati III, who is sub-Saharan Africas last
absolute monarch.
In an unprecedented move the JSC issued the threat in a media statement. It was delivered
after newspapers in Swaziland raised objections to the case of Bheki Makhubu, the editor of
the nation magazine and Thulani Maseko, a human rights lawyer. Both men have been in jail
since 17 March 2014 facing contempt of court charges for articles they wrote in the magazine
criticising Chief Justice Michael Ramodibedi and the judiciary.
The JSC warned organisations and members of the public that it was wrong for anyone to
comment on the pending contempt of court proceedings at this stage.
The warning also follows publication of two articles by the Swazi Observer group of
newspapers that criticised the appointment of High Court Judge Mpendulo Simelane and
suggested CJ Ramodibedi and other judges had received allowances they were not entitled to.
The publication by the Observer has added significance because it is in effect owned by King
Mswati, and the King appoints the judges in his kingdom.
Reporting the media release, the Times of Swaziland, the only independent daily newspaper
in the kingdom, said, The JSC has since warned organisations and members of the public
that it was inappropriate for anyone to comment on the pending contempt of court
proceedings at this stage.

5

The commission further stated that contempt of court in this jurisdiction was one of the most
serious offences against the administration of justice.
The JSC said Swazilands Constitution did not allow people to criticise the judiciary. This
was in order to maintain the authority, dignity and independence of the courts.
The Times reported, The JSC said in this jurisdiction [Swaziland], freedom of expression
was subject to respect for other peoples rights and it was not absolute as the progressive
organisations and other like-minded persons seem to suggest.
See also
KINGS PAPER QUESTIONS ABILITY OF JUDGE

Judiciary no right to berate media
3 April 2014

Swazilands Judicial Service Commission (JSC) had no power to warn the kingdoms media
against criticising judges.

The constitutional role of the JSC is to oversee judges, not to involve itself in the conduct of
the media or members of the public.
The JSC commented on the ongoing case of Bheki Makhubu, the editor of the Nation
magazine and Thulani Maseko, a human rights lawyer. Both men have been in jail on remand
since 17 March 2014 awaiting trial on contempt of court charges. These arise from articles
they wrote in the Nation criticising the Swazi judiciary and in particular the Chief Justice
Michael Ramodibedi.
The JSC in a statement to media warned organisations and members of the public that it was
wrong for anyone to comment on the pending contempt of court proceedings.
It said the Swaziland Constitution did not allow for freedom of speech in such cases.
The JSC is chaired by the CJ Ramodibedi, who is the man at the centre of the criticisms
published by the Nation.
The JSC has overstepped its powers by making the statement. The JSC is set up under the
Swaziland Constitution, which states that its functions are to advise the King on the
appointment, discipline and removal of the Director of Public Prosecutions and other public
officers.
It is also required to review and make recommendations on the terms and conditions of
service of Judges and persons holding the judicial offices.
The JSC also functions as a complaints bureau and receives and process recommendations
and complaints concerning the judiciary.

6

It has other functions, including advising the government on improving the administration of
justice generally and appointing people to legal positions.
Nowhere in the constitution does it say it has a role to make public statements about judicial
matters.
Nobody who observes Swaziland will be surprised that the JSC has over-reached its powers.
It was created by King Mswati III, who rules Swaziland as sub-Saharan Africas last absolute
monarch. The chair of the JSC is the Chief Justice, who is appointed by the King. There are
five other members of the commission: four are directly appointed by the King, and the other
has to be Chairman of the Civil Service Commission, himself chosen by the King.
The judiciary in Swaziland is not independent since all judicial officers are appointed by the
King and they owe their allegiance to him. Meanwhile, the Swaziland Constitution puts the
King and the Queen Mother beyond the reach of the law.
As Freedom House, in an analysis of Swaziland, noted, The Kings absolute authority over
the judiciary renders the Swazi legal system hazardous for investors, attorneys and anyone
who displeases the King.

Ambassadors support jailed writers
4 April 2014

The European Union Ambassador to Swaziland Nicole Bellomo and the US Ambassador to
Swaziland Makila James both visited the High Court on Friday (4 April 2014) in solidarity
with the magazine editor Bheki Makhubu and human rights lawyer Thulani Maseko who
have been jailed on remand after writing articles critical of Chief Justice Michael Ramodibedi
and the Swazi judiciary.
The unprecedented show of solidarity was the latest turn of events in a saga that started on 17
March 2014 when both men were arrested and charged with contempt of court. Makhubu and
Maseko were remanded in custody by CJ Ramodibedi, the man who was on the receiving end
the writers criticism in articles published in the Nation, a monthly comment magazine in
Swaziland.
The decision to jail the two men took place behind closed doors and the mens lawyers were
not present.

The jailings caused an international outcry, with human rights organisations calling for the
two men to be freed immediately. Amnesty International has named Makhubu and Maseko
prisoners of conscience.

Swaziland is ruled by King Mswati III, sub-Saharan Africas last absolute monarch. The
King appoints the government and top judges and freedom of speech is severely restricted in
his kingdom.
On Wednesday (2 April 2014) the Judicial Services Commission, which is chaired by CJ
Ramodibedi and consists of people handpicked by King Mswati, issued a public warning
against commenting about the case. Independent observers have interpreted this as a threat to
critics of the regime that they too will be jailed.

7

US Ambassador James in an impromptu media conference at the High Court said the United
States was concerned about their arrest because Maseko and Makhubu were expressing their
opinions. We are here in solidarity and to give moral support, she said.
Hundreds of supports turned up at the High Court on Friday as Maseko and Makhubu
appeared in court in leg-irons for the third time in a week. The men were trying to get the
court to overturn CJ Ramodibedis jailing order.

Does Chief Justice know the law?
8 April 2014

Either Swazilands Chief Justice Michael Ramodibedi does not understand the law in the
kingdom, or he chooses not to apply it.
That has to be the main conclusion after a High Court judgement that freed Nation magazine
editor, Bheki Makhubu and human rights lawyer Thulani Maseko from jail on Sunday (6
April 2014).
The two men had been sent to jail on remand to await trial on contempt of court charges. This
followed publication of articles in the Nation that were critical of CJ Ramodibedi.
Makhubu and Maseko went to the Swazi High Court to demand their release because they
had illegally been arrested and sent to jail. They argued that CJ Ramodibedi had unlawfully
issued a summons for their arrest and then heard the case behind closed doors in chambers,
without lawyers present. They argued that he had no power to send them to jail and that no
law officer had requested they be imprisoned.
High Court Judge Mumcy Dlamini agreed with them and in a judgement that took her less
than a minute to read out, she released the men. They had been in jail for 20 days.
In her written judgement, Dlamini said that CJ Ramodibedi had sent the men to jail without
hearing arguments or submissions why they should not be.
She added that the law in Swaziland stated that it was a magistrates job to issue arrest
warrants.
She said the affidavits used to support the warrant of arrest were incompetent in law
because they were raised by the Chief Justices clerk, who was representing the Chief Justice.
The Chief Justice claimed to be injured by the contents of the articles the two accused men
wrote.
Judge Dlamini said, A person attesting an affidavit must be completely objective and have
no interest of any kind in the contents or input of that affidavit.
She went on to say that the hearing should not have been heard in the Chief Justices
chambers.
A matter of such magnitude viz. incarceration of persons ought to have been deliberated
fully in an open court.

8

Dlamini added that she did not think Chief Justice Ramodibedi would have issued the arrest
warrant and acted the way he did if he had known these things.
Which begs these questions: does the Chief Justice of Swaziland not know basic law, or is it
that he knows the law, but chooses not to apply it to his critics?

Confusion over editors re-arrest
8 April 2014

There was widespread confusion in Swaziland on Tuesday (8 April 2014) regarding the status
of Nation magazine editor Bheki Makhubu and human rights lawyer Thulani Maseko.

Both men were released from jail by the Swazi High Court on Sunday after spending 20 days
on remand awaiting trial on contempt of court charges, following the publication of articles
critical of Chief Justice Michael Ramodibedi.

But, reports were circulating in Swaziland that new arrest warrants had been issued against
the two men, but that police officers were reluctant to execute them without the express
command of the Swazi Police Commissioner Isaac Magagula.

At the centre of the case is Chief Justice Ramodibedi, who on 17 March issued warrants for
the arrest of Makhubu and Maseko and then sent them to jail on remand. He did this in closed
court without lawyers present.

High Court Judge Mumcy Dlamini in a judgement that took her less than a minute to read
out, released the men. They had been in jail for 20 days.

In her written judgement, Dlamini said that CJ Ramodibedi had sent the men to jail without

warrants.

wrote.


chambers.



9

On Monday the office of the Attorney General appealed the High Court judgment. This
should be heard by the Supreme Court in May.

Meanwhile, the Swazi Observer newspaper has reported that the Chief Justice is angry that
Makhubu and Maseko were freed from jail after the High Court ruling. It reported that Judge
Dlamini had not specifically stated the two men should be freed and no release warrant had
been signed.

It reported that on Monday Ramodibedi summoned to his chambers Superintendent Joseph
Mahlindza, the Officer-in Charge at Sidwashini Correctional Services, where the two had
been jailed, together with two officers. They had to answer to him why the two prisoners had
been released without a liberation warrant.

Under normal circumstances, the liberation warrant is signed by the Registrar of the High
Court, the Observer reported.

Editor and lawyer to be re-arrested
9 April 2014

Warrants were issued for the re-arrest of the editor of the Nation magazine Bheki Makhubu
and human rights lawyer Thulani Maseko in Swaziland on Wednesday (9 April 2014).
It happened when they attended the High Court to attempt to have Judge Mpendulo Simelane
stand down from hearing a case against them. Both men are charged with contempt of court
after they wrote articles in the Nation magazine critical of the Swaziland Chief Justice
Michael Ramodibedi.
Instead, Judge Simelane issued warrants for their arrests.
Makhubu and Maseko had previously been remanded to jail by Ramodibedi, but on Sunday
after 20 days they were released by the High Court and had been free since then.
Judge Simelane said Wednesday no liberation warrants had been issued after the High Court
judgement on Sunday. This meant that the men had not been lawfully released.
At the centre of the case is Ramodibedi, who on 17 March issued warrants for the arrest of
Makhubu and Maseko and then sent them to jail on remand. He did this in closed court
without lawyers present.
High Court Judge Mumcy Dlamini in a judgement that took her less than a minute to read
out, released the men. On Monday the office of the Attorney General appealed the High
Court judgment. This should be heard by the Supreme Court in May.
In her written judgement, Dlamini said that Ramodibedi had sent the men to jail without
warrants.

10

wrote.


chambers.

Back to jail for editor and lawyer
10 April 2014

Swazilands justice system was in a state of confusion on Thursday (10 April 2014) when
magazine editor Bheki Makhubu and human rights lawyer Thulani Maseko were remanded in
custody until 14 April 2014, despite having been released by the High Court only last Sunday
(5 April 2014) after spending 20 days in jail.
The two men have been in and out of court over the past three weeks and it is thought they
will be there again on Friday (11 April 2014) for a pre-trial conference.
Meanwhile, an appeal lodged with the Supreme Court by the Attorney-Generals Office
against the release of the two men seems to have been overlooked. It was to be heard in May.
At the centre of the case are contempt of court charges that have been laid against Makhubu
and Maseko after they wrote articles in the Nation magazine in Swaziland criticising the
Swazi Chief Justice Michael Ramodibedi. The two men had spent 20 days in jail after
Ramodibedi himself issued an arrest warrant and, in a closed court, without lawyers present,
had sent them to jail to await trial.
On Sunday (5 April 2014) High Court Judge Mumcy Dlamini ruled they should not have
been jailed.

Makhubu and Maseko were freed, but later it transpired that no liberation warrants had been
served and the pair might not have been legally released.
Then on Wednesday the two men sent their lawyers to the High Court in front of Judge
Mpendulo Simelane in an attempt to get him to stand down from hearing the contempt case
against them. This was because Simelane was one of the judges criticised in the articles.
Judge Simelane then issued warrants for the re-arrest of Makhubu and Maseko because they
had not appeared in his court. This was even though they had been released from jail and an
appeal against this had yet to be heard. Their lawyers argued this meant there was no
compulsion for the men to appear.

Later in the day they were apprehended and jailed.

11

On Thursday they appeared in a courtroom packed with supporters. After legal arguments
that the arrest warrants for the two men were not legal, because Judge Simelane acted beyond
his powers, Judge Simelane himself ruled the warrants were lawful and remanded the two
men to jail.
There is now also confusion about the status of the Supreme Court appeal. It appears that
High Court Judge Simelane has pre-empted that appeal and in effect decided himself that
High Court Judge Dlamini was wrong in her judgment last Sunday.
Judge Simelane has been subjected to some criticism since his appointment by Chief Justice
Ramodibedi to the High Court in February 2014. The Sunday Observer, a newspaper in
Swaziland in effect owned by King Mswati III, who rules Swaziland as sub-Saharan Africas
last absolute monarch, said Simelane lacked the necessary experience.

On Thursday the Law Society of Swaziland said it had tried to register an application
challenging the appointment of Simelane as a judge of the High Court, but the Registrar of
the High Court was refusing to accept it due to pressure from Ramodibedi.

Court cannot curb support for editor
16 April 2014

Police and court officials in Swaziland have been caught on the hop by the support given to
the magazine editor and human rights lawyer presently in jail awaiting trial on charges arising
from criticisms they made of the judiciary in the kingdom.
At the latest hearing in the Swazi High Court, relatives and supporters of Nation magazine
editor Bheki Makhubu and lawyer Thulani Maseko were denied entry into the courtroom.

The two men have made a number of appearances at the High Court since they were charged
with Contempt of Court on 18 March 2014. At each appearance the courtroom has been
packed with their supporters.

On Monday (14 April 2014), at the latest hearing, court authorities moved the session to the
smallest court in the building, even though larger ones were available. This meant that many
people who wanted to attend the hearing could not.
Police also reportedly blocked the entrance to the High Court to prevent supporters entering
the building. The incident was widely reported with words and pictures on social media as it
was happening.
The extent of the support in court for the two accused men is unprecedented in Swaziland,
where King Mswati III rules as sub-Saharan Africas last absolute monarch and free speech
and freedom of assembly are severely restricted.
Two days earlier police had illegally abducted prodemocracy leaders to prevent them
addressing a meeting calling for freedom in Swaziland. They were also expected to have
spoken in support of Makhubu and Maseko.

12

Social media sites such as Facebook and Twitter have been extensively used to inform people
about the happenings in court. Broadcast media in Swaziland is state-controlled and has
ignored the proceedings.
Of the two newspaper groups in the kingdom, one is in effect owned by King Mswati and the
other has restricted its coverage. Innocent Maphalala, editor of the independent Times
Sunday, went so far as to tell his readers in print that he feared being sent to jail if he wrote
anything that was deemed unacceptable by the authorities about the case.
The Peoples United Democratic Movement (PUDEMO), the best known of the pro-
democracy groups in Swaziland, said the police action to deny entry to the court was a
brazen disregard for the rights of relatives and friends of the two accused men.
In a statement it said police and court authorities were aware of the huge interest in the case
and the large number of people that previously attended, and as an obvious act of sabotage,
chose to use the smaller court. It added that plain-clothed policemen were also placed in the
court to take up as many available seats as possible.
Makhubu and Maseko are expected to appear in court again on 22 April 2014 for the start of
their trial.
Prodemocracy groups from across the world have called for the immediate release of the two
men. Amnesty International has named them prisoners of conscience.

Media ignore attack on Swazi King
11 June 2014

Media in Swaziland have once again misrepresented events in order to deflect criticism of
King Mswati III.

The latest in a long line of cases happened at the Swazi High Court in the case of Thulani
Maseko, the human rights lawyer who, along with Bheki Makhubu, the editor of the Nation
magazine, are on trial for contempt of court, following the publication of articles critical of
the judiciary in Swaziland.

Maseko made a submission in court in which he contended he was innocent of the charges.
This was reported in the Swazi Observer and the Times of Swaziland, the only significant
newspapers in Swaziland.

But both newspapers, and the broadcast media which with two exceptions are all state
controlled, refused to report the main thrust of Masekos speech which was a criticism of the
political system in Swaziland and King Mswatis role.

Maseko said that in August 2012 the King convened what is known as Sibaya. The Swazi
Constitution states, The people through Sibaya constitute the highest policy and advisory
council (Libandla) of the nation. The King is the Chairman of the meeting.

Maseko said the King was at the centre of it all. He added, This means that he

13

bears the ultimate responsibility to ensure that the peoples resolutions are executed and
implemented.

However, Maseko said, the overwhelming majority of those who spoke at Sibaya called for
multi-party democracy in Swaziland. At present King Mswati rules Swaziland as sub-Saharan
Africas last absolute monarch.

He added, The question that arises is whether this recommendation / resolution were
implemented, or even worse, whether there are any plans to implement same? The answer, as
far as we are concerned, is in the negative. It is our respectful submission that the failure or
refusal to give effect and meaning to the peoples resolution and aspirations to move towards
a Peoples Democracy, as opposed to the much talked about vague Monarchial Democracy, is
contemptuous to the people of this land.

In 2013, King Mswati claimed to have had a vision in which he was told the right form of
government in his kingdom was Monarchial Democracy, but when he was asked to explain
what it was, he said it was the same as the present tinkhundla system.

Maseko also criticised King Mswati as being above the law. He said Pronouncements by
the King become Swazi Law when they are made known to the nation, especially at
Esibayeni or Royal Cattle Byre. The King is referred to as umlomo longacali manga (the
mouth that never lies). That is before any pronouncement or/proclamation, the King will
have consulted and will have been advised.

We respectfully submit that such an arrangement is inconsistent with constitutionalism and
the Rule of Law which embody democratic governance. For the King is not subject to judicial
review, making him above the law.

He added, Rule of Law means that it is the law which ultimately rules, not a monarch, not a
president or prime minister, clearly not a dictator, not even a benevolent dictator. Under the
Rule of Law no one is above or beyond the law. The law is the ruler.

He added. In so far as the people have called for a democratic process of forming a
government under the Rule of Law, they have been treated contemptuously. We surely need
leaders who better understand the Rule of Law.

Maseko also criticised King Mswati for appointing Barnabas Dlamini Prime Minister. He
said Sibaya had asked King Mswati III and the leadership of this country to give them their
right to elect a Prime Minister.

King Mswati appoints the prime Minister and Government; none are elected by the people.

He added, Is it not contemptuous that while the people called for the removal from office of
the Right Honourable Dr. Sibusiso B. Dlamini in the last term, he was instead, re-appointed
without their consent?

He added, I respectfully argue that the failure and refusal by the highest authority of this
land [King Mwsati] to remove the Prime Minister and instead, re-appointing him is highly
contemptuous of the peoples will and aspirations.


14

In Swaziland the monarch only appoints a man from the Dlamini family, which includes the
Royal Family, to the position of Prime Minister.

Maseko said, In any case, what is the criteria or basis for appointing a Prime Minister? Is it
not Royal Dlaminism supremacy and superiority? We contend that this is the kind of evil
domination of a people by another, which moved and inspired men of conscience and
goodwill, to rise up and challenge such immoral social orders. Tinkhundla [the present
system of government in Swaziland] is our Swaziland version of South Africas grand
Apartheid and racial segregation and discrimination in the United States. It must be
dismantled, it is inhumane.

Maseko also said that at the Sibaya meeting people asked for Circular No.1 of 2010to be
abandoned. This policy document allowed for substantial payments to government ministers,
members of parliament an d civil servants when parliament was dissolved in 2013.

He said, We listened and heard, speaker after speaker, condemn and attack this document as
illegitimate in the face of massive poverty and unemployment.

The natives of this land saw this, not as intended to eradicate and alleviate poverty, but
meant to secure the comfort of self-serving politicians while we the poor, suffer terrible
poverty and unemployment.

What level of contempt of the masses of the people can we speak of? I insist that I am not
guilty, but the leadership of Swaziland, jointly, collectively and severally should be in the
dock for contempt of the people.

He said is Sibaya was considered to be the kingdoms annual general meeting then failure
to execute and implement such decisions and resolutions invite and warrant a vote of no
confidence on the leadership. More than just a vote of no confidence, the non-implementation
and intransigent refusal to give effect to the Peoples resolution in the light of section 232 [of
the Swaziland Constitution] amounts to the suspension and or abrogation of the section.

Consequently this is an act of treason.

Paper censors Chief Justice criticism
12 June 2014

The Times Sunday newspaper in Swaziland has once again censored itself and in so doing has
completely misrepresented is regular columnist Musa Hlophe.

Hlophe, who is the coordinator of the Swaziland Coalition of Concerned Civic Organisations,
a prodemocracy group, writes for the newspaper every week. On 8 June 2014 the Times
deleted references about Swazi Chief Justice Michael Ramodibedi from the article.

Hlophe wrote a critical assessment of the CJ, who is from Lesotho and is under increasing
pressure from democrats to stand down as the judiciary in the kingdom is in crisis.

However, the only part of the assessment the newspaper published was this: You know, I
have always admired and respected the person of Chief Justice Ramodibedi. I have always

15

considered him a good lawyer and a person who just happens to serve a wrong master in the
name of the Government of Swaziland, but always trusted him because of his Christian
background: he is a devout Catholic, and Catholics preach social justice from their pulpits!

Here is the full text from the article that the Times Sunday felt its readers were not entitled to
see.

Secondly, I wish to express my grave concerns about what one newspaper
attributed to His Lordship, the Chief Justice of the Kingdom of ESwatini. If the
paper has correctly quoted him, it is alleged that he made this startling
allegation that there is a conspiracy to overthrow the king of Swaziland, His
Majesty King Mswati 111! Headlined:" Secret Mission to dethrone King:" the
articles talks of plotters to have even polluted the judiciary, and that he is
ready to deal with these. I have waited for reactions from both the Prime
Minister, in his capacity as Minister of Police and the Minister of Justice, who
is the political head the judiciary, but, sadly, there has been no comment or
correction of this mischievous statement.

Why do we, as Swazis, have to be told by a foreigner about the security
threats to our King? Does the Chief Justice, who seems to have more
problems in his own country, challenges he should be concerned with, wish to
tell us, the loyal citizens of this kingdom, that he is so informed about the
security of our Monarchy, than our security agencies? What is his motive in
saying these allegations soon after he was said to be facing impeachment in
his own country, for alleged serious misconduct on his part? If at all there are
citizens who are having these plots, why hasn't he shared these fears or
perceptions, quietly with the police? And how can we defend him against
those allegations that he has a warrant to arrest, at least, three if not four
judges, including Justice Qinisile Mabuza, who recently surprised this nation,
by refunding Government, the monies she considered not deserved for the
kind of work she was being paid for? IF at all, there judges who are part of a
plot to dethrone the king, why has this not been handled by the Judicial
Service Commission? Why is the Chief justice seemingly having problems
with competent local judges? Should we smell intimidation here? This is
worrying to me. I am sorry.

You know, I have always admired and respected the person of Chief Justice
Ramodibedi. I have always considered him a good lawyer and a person who
just happens to serve a wrong master in the name of the Government of
Swaziland, but always trusted him because of his Christian background: he is
a devout Catholic, and Catholics preach social justice from their pulpits! I
thought that given this background, that he would approach issues of justice
in the way our God commands: doing justice to the poor and weak and not to
favour the rich and powerful. Thus says The Lord our God.

If the Honourable Chief Justice wants Swazi citizenship, which I believe he
deserves, he must first respect the common Swazi such as I and those Swazis
he is privileged to be their master. The moment he is seen to be demonizing
anyone of them, then he will have lost our respect. He just needs to know that
the Swazi system has been known to misuse the services of foreigners to

16

suppress the Swazis, and once done, and then throw these foreigners in a
manner rather too shameful to imagine! Be warned.

Thirdly and lastly, one applauds the judgment in the appeal case won case
won by Bheki Makhuu and The Nation Magazine from the Supreme Court.

The original article was published in the printed newspaper and on the Times of Swaziland
website. It has now been removed from the website.

This is not the first time the Times Sunday has censored Musa Hlophe. In March 2014 it
refused to publish his article about the trial of Bheki Makhubu and Thulani Maseko, who are
on trial for contempt of court after writing and publishing articles critical of the CJ Michael
Ramodibedi and the judiciary in Swaziland. He wrote at the time that On trial now is no
longer Thulani Maseko and Bheki Makhubu, for whatever they might have been accused of,
but on trial now is the country and its institutions of power.

In April 2013, Hlophe was also censored when he made a mild criticism of King Sobhuza II,
father of the present King. Hlophe wrote, In 1973, His Majesty, declared a state of
emergency that has never been openly repealed. He set up an army that is only capable of
threatening or harming its own people.

Worst of all, he set in motion a series of events that has led to Swaziland being among the
sickest, the poorest, the most corrupt and the unhappiest nations in the world. Swaziland is
no longer a place of African heritage and pride, it is now a place that most other Africans
either pity or scorn.

Media in Swaziland have long history of self-censorship, especially when reporting on King
Mswati III, who rules the kingdom as sub-Saharan Africas last absolute monarch. The Swazi
Observer newspaper group is in effect owned by the King and all but two of the broadcast
media in Swaziland are state controlled.

See also

PAPER DISTORTS STORY TO PROTECT KING
MORE MEDIA SELF-CENSORSHIP OVER KING
CENSORSHIP OVER KINGS LATEST BRIDE
CRITICISM OF SWAZI KING CENSORED


17

2. JUDICIAL CRISIS
CJ arrest warrant for critical judges
19 May 2014

A newspaper in Swaziland reported on Monday (19 May 2014) that the controversial Chief
Justice Michael Ramodibedi had issued warrants for the arrest of three High Court Judges
because they disagreed with his actions.
He was reported to be ready to appoint his own judges to replace those arrested.
The Swazi Observer, a newspaper in effect owned by King Mswati III, who appointed
Ramodibedi, said the three judges were Justices Mumcy Dlamini, Bheki Maphalala and
Mbutfo Mamba. At the time of this report (Monday 19 May 2014) police had not executed
the warrants.
The Observer reported Ramodibedi allegedly issued the warrants last Friday. They were
issued, it said because the CJ felt the judges were ignoring his orders and bringing the High
Court into disrepute.
The newspaper reported, According to a reliable source at the High Court, the Chief Justice
alleges that Judge Bheki Maphalala is influencing his staff members not to take orders from
him. Maphalala, according to the source, is spearheading a High Court rebellion.
Judge Mamba is alleged to have tried taking over the bail application of The Nation Editor
Bheki Makhubu and Human Rights Lawyer Thulani Maseko.
This is alleged to have angered the CJ and he decided to have him also arrested. Judge
Mumcy is the number one enemy of the CJ. It is no surprise that she has been included in the
list of those whose warrants of arrest were issued, the source alleged.
Judge Mumcy has on record ruled that the CJ erred in the way he issued the warrants of
arrest that landed The Nation Editor Bheki Makhubu and Thulani Maseko in jail. She
released the duo but they were later re-arrested soon after gaining freedom.
The newspaper added, [The] CJ is alleged to have highlighted in his chambers that he no
longer trusted most of the Judges of the High Court. This is alleged to have transpired when
The Law Society of Swaziland wanted their application for the removal of Judge Mpendulo
Simelane allocated a judge. The Chief Justice is alleged to have failed to allocate the matter
and highlighted that he no longer trusted most of the judges.
The Observer reported. Should the warrants be effected and the judges arrested, the CJ is
alleged to have planned to appoint interim judges who will deal with the Law Society, which
wants a full bench to listen to their application calling for the firing of newly appointed Judge
Mpendulo Simelane. The CJ is alleged to be afraid to have the three judges sit in the full
bench and listen to the Judge Mpendulo case as they might rule against him.
Ramodibedi is at the centre of a number of controversial decisions in Swaziland. Last week
the Mail and Guardian newspaper in South Africa reported that Ramodibedi has told Swazi
judges that they have a constitutional duty to obey him. He has also ordered that judges could

18

not hear cases against King Mswati III, who rules as sub-Saharan Africas last absolute
monarch, or royal institutions.
The Mail and Guardian reported that Ramodibedi had a reputation for intimidation. He has
intervened in the continuing trial against Bheki Makhubu, the editor of the Nation magazine,
who is in court on contempt of court charges after publishing articles critical of Ramodibedi
and the Swazi judiciary.
The newspaper reported, Ramodibedis interventions in the Makhubu trial, some of doubtful
legality, are seen as driven by both a personal grudge and a desire to gratify Mswati. The
treatment of Makhubu shows signs of vindictive overkill: armed police stormed his parents
rural homestead and a heavily armed police guard escorted him from prison to court.
It added Ramodibedi laid two contempt charges against Makhubu.
Makhubu was denied bail as an alleged flight risk. Ramodibedi has also personally
threatened the managing editor of the Swazi Observer with arrest if the newspaper continued
to comment on the Makhubu trial, it said.

Supreme Court judges threaten to quit
26 May 2014

Two Supreme Court judges have threatened to resign if a warrant issued by the Swaziland
Chief Justice for the arrest of three High Court judges who are critical of him is served, a
South African newspaper has reported.

Now, the Mail and Guardian reports arrests may take place immediately after the present
Supreme Court session ends on Friday (30 May 2014).

Swazilands Chief Justice Michael reportedly issued the warrants on 16 May 2014, but the
Swazi police did not make the arrests.

The three judges are judges Mumcy Dlamini, Bheki Maphalala and Mbutfo Mamba.
CJ Ramodibedi denied a report that originally appeared in the Swazi Observer, a newspaper
in effect owned by King Mswati III, who rules Swaziland as sub-Saharan Africas last
absolute monarch, and who appointed the Lesotho-born Ramodibedi to his office.

In its report, the Observer said the arrest warrants were issued because the CJ felt the judges
were ignoring his orders and bringing the High Court into disrepute.

The newspaper reported, According to a reliable source at the High Court, the Chief Justice
alleges that Judge Bheki Maphalala is influencing his staff members not to take orders from
him. Maphalala, according to the source, is spearheading a High Court rebellion.

The Observer added, Judge Mamba is alleged to have tried taking over the bail application
of The Nation Editor Bheki Makhubu and Human Rights Lawyer Thulani Maseko.

After Ramodibedis denial of the story, the Observer ran an editorial saying it stood by its
report.

19

The Mail and Guardian reported an unnamed source saying the execution of the warrants had
been delayed because two foreign judges of the supreme court Swazilands court of appeal
had threatened an immediate walkout if the arrests took place.

The supreme court is in session until May 30, and there are fears that the arrests could take
place immediately after it goes into recess.

In its original report, the Observer said Ramodibedi already had replacements lined up to take
over from the arrested judges.

Paper defies court over sources
14 June 2014

The Swazi Observer newspaper has refused to disclose to the Swaziland High Court its
sources in a report that said the Chief Justice Michael Ramodibedi had issued warrants for the
arrest of three judges in the kingdom.
The Registrar of the High Court wrote to the newspaper which is in effect owned by King
Mswati III, who rules Swaziland as sub-Saharan Africas last absolute monarch. The letter
said, On May 19, 2014 you wrongfully and intentionally published a scandalous and
contemptuous story to the effect that the Chief Justice of Swaziland had issued warrants
against three High Court Judges.
According to a report in the Swazi News, a rival publication to the Observer, the registrars
letter went on to say, when it was brought to the attention of the editor of the Swazi Observer
that the allegation was false and a blatant lie aimed at scandalising the chief justice, the
Judiciary and the administration of justice in Swaziland, he remained defiant.
The Swazi News said, The registrar said the editor instead issued another publication on May
20, 2014 where it was stated that they stood by their story.
The letter continued, In these circumstances you are hereby called upon to produce proof of
the so-called warrants of arrests within two days from receipt of this letter [11 June 2014] or
face the legal consequences for your blatant and contemptuous lies, a dirty campaign which
you have passionately been waging for sometime now.
Swazi Observer Managing Editor Mbongeni Mbingo responded in writing to the office of the
Registrar of the High Court. It read in part, Unfortunately, we are not in a position to
disclose information, material and sources of our publications, which we have a legal and
ethical duty to protect.


20

3. HUMAN RIGHTS
Thousand people in jail for being poor
8 April 2014

More than 1,000 people are in jail in Swaziland because they are too poor to pay fines. That
is nearly three in ten of the entire prison population.
In Swaziland offenders are often given the option of jail time or paying a fine. There are
people in jail because they could not pay fines for a range of matters, including traffic
offences, theft by false pretences, malicious injury to property and fraud.
Figures revealed recently show that in Swaziland, where seven in ten people live in abject
poverty with incomes less than US$2 per day, 1,053 of 3,615 inmates in Swazi jails were
there because they did not have the money to pay the fine option. This is 29.1 percent of the
entire prison population.
Correctional Services Commissioner Isaiah Ntshangase said the numbers in prison because
they could not pay fines was growing. He wants offenders to be given the option of paying
fines in instalments, rather than going to jail.
The fact that the courts gave them the option of a fine means that they were not a threat to
peace and security. Creating payment terms for those who fail to pay lump sum fines wont
harm anyone, the Sunday Observer newspaper in Swaziland reported Ntshangase saying.
He added, Offenders who committed minor offences and qualified for fine but failed to pay
should be given a further option of paying such fines in instalments.
He said often offenders were required to pay the fine immediately of go to jail. They were not
given time to raise the money.
Once an offender is convicted, his bargain power dwindles. This has caused many to rot
behind bars yet they could have been released if they paid the fines, he said.
Ntshangase said keeping people out of prison would stop them being exposed to hardened
criminals.

Police abduct democracy leaders
13 April 2014

Police in Swaziland illegally abducted prodemocracy leaders on Saturday (12 April 2014),
drove them up to 30 kilometres away, and dumped them to prevent them taking part in a
meeting calling for freedom in the kingdom.
Police staged roadblocks on all major roads leading to Swazilands main commercial city,
Manzini, where protests were to be held.
Police also physically blocked halls to prevent meetings taking place. Earlier in the day
police had announced on state radio that meetings would not be allowed to take place.

21

The intended protests were part of the annual 12 April commemorations in Swaziland. On 12
April 1973 King Sobhuza II issued a Royal proclamation dissolving parliament, banning
political parties and placing all power in the kingdom in the hands of the monarchy. This was
because he disapproved of some of the MPs elected to parliament by his subjects.
Today, King Mswati III rules Swaziland as sub-Saharan Africas last absolute monarch.
Swazi media reported that trade union leaders including Vincent Ncongwane, the Secretary
General of Trade Union Congress of Swaziland (TUCOSWA); Quinton Dlamini, President of
National Public Service and Allied Workers Union (NAPSAWU) and Thandokwazi Dludlu,
Secretary General of the Public and Private Sector Transport Union (PPSTWU) were
separately arrested by police and taken to a series of police stations for questioning. They
were denied access to lawyers.
The Times Sunday, an independent newspaper in Swaziland, reported, they were separately
taken to up to 30 km away from the planned meeting place and then dumped.
The leaders were among a number of trade unionists reportedly picked up by police for
questioning.
Meanwhile, more than 50 workers from textile firms were blocked from a meeting organised
by TUCOSWA at a school in Manzini. Police made sure the workers could not meet
elsewhere and blocked the gates to Caritas, a popular venue for prodemocracy meetings, in
Manzini, Local media also reported armed police were at the Mandlenkhosi Ecumenical
House to prevent a meeting taking place there.

Kings defiant subjects will burn
17 April 2014

King Mswati IIIs right-hand man has told a community they will burn if they continue to
defy instructions from the King.
And, the Swaziland King ordered a complete silence from his subjects in the kaLuhleko
chiefdom about his decision to appoint their chief.
The warning was delivered by Ludzidzini Royal Residence Governor Timothy Velabo
Mtetwa, who is commonly known in Swaziland as the traditional prime minister. This
means he is the voice of the King and more powerful than Barnabas Dlamini, the man the
King appointed as Swazilands figurehead PM.
Mtetwa and a delegation from the King visited kaLuhleko on Monday (14 April 2014) to
issue a dire warning. The Swazi Observer, a newspaper in effect owned by the King, who is
sub-Saharan Africas last absolute monarch, reported Bhekwako Dlamini of kaLuhleko has
been mobilising the people to snub meetings called by the newly appointed Chief Zulwelihle
Maseko, who was blessed by Their Majesties last June.
The newspaper reported, His Majesty roared through Ludzidzini Governor Timothy Velabo
Mtetwa commonly known as TV.

22

It has gotten to the attention of His Majesty the King and the Queen Mother that there is
something irregular happening here and that is why we are here today, he said to deafening
silence.
There is a bad habit that has come to the attention of the authorit ies that there are some
people who still choose to defy the chief and do not recognise a man who has been appointed
by the King. Where have you ever heard of that? This is the person who has been chosen to
take over from Mfanwenkhosi Maseko and I have been sent by His Majesty to order that
there be complete silence in this place, said the tough talking Mtetwa.
The Observer reported Mthethwa warned that people who did not adhere to the directive
issued by the King will burn.
Swazi chiefs have enormous power. It is through chieftaincies that King Mswati maintains
control of his people and chiefs do his bidding at a local level. People know not to get on the
wrong side of the chief because their livelihood depends on his goodwill. In some parts of
Swaziland the chiefs are given the power to decide who gets food that has been donated by
international agencies. The chiefs quite literally have power of life and death in such cases
with about a third of the population of Swaziland receiving food aid each year.
Chiefs can and do take revenge on their subjects who disobey them. There is a catalogue of
cases in Swaziland. For example, Chief Dambuza Lukhele of Ngobelweni in the Shiselweni
region banned his subjects from ploughing their fields because some of them defied his order
to build a hut for one of his wives.
Nhlonipho Nkamane Mkhatswa, chief of Lwandle in Manzini, the main commercial city in
Swaziland, reportedly stripped a woman of her clothing in the middle of a street in full view
of the public because she was wearing trousers.
In November 2013, the newly-appointed Chief Ndlovula of Motshane threatened to evict
nearly 1,000 of his subjects from grazing land if they did not pay him a E5,000 (US$500)
fine, the equivalent of more than six months income for many.
He said his subjects had illegally built homes on land put aside for grazing.
See also
CHIEF FORCES SUBJECTS TO GREET KING

People unhappy with Swazi democracy
24 April 2014

More than six people in ten in Swaziland say they are not satisfied with the way democracy
works in the kingdom.
This was one of the findings in a report called Let the People Have a Say, published this
week by Afrobarometer.

23

The research surveyed 34-countries in Africa and asked a series of questions about what
people thought about democracy and how democratic they thought their own country was.
But, only in Swaziland were researchers were not allowed to ask a question about whether
people rejected one man rule. In its report Afrobarometer said this was because a near-
absolute monarch resists democratization in the kingdom.
Among the reports main findings were that in Swaziland 46 percent of people surveyed said
democracy is preferable to any other government.
Only 35 percent of people were somewhat or very satisfied with the way democracy worked
in Swaziland.
A total of 22 percent of people said they believed non-democratic governments can be
preferable to democracies.
In Swaziland political parties are banned from taking part in elections and political parties
that campaigned for democracy in the kingdom have been banned as terrorists. Even so, 70
percent of people strongly disapproved of one-party rule.
Dissent in Swaziland is often put down by police and state forces, but 86 percent of people
rejected military rule for Swaziland.
Across the continent seven out of 10 Africans prefer democracy to other political regimes.
The report raised questions about the depth of Africans support for democracy, suggesting
that levels of support depend on whether citizens were experiencing democracy and whether
they felt they were benefitting from it.
The report concluded the demand for, or commitment to, democracy was much lower in
countries where democracy is disputed or elections are not held such as Algeria, Egypt,
Madagascar and Swaziland.
The report was authored by Professor Michael Bratton of Michigan State University in the
United States and Richard Houessou of the Institute for Empirical Research in Political
Economy (IREEP) in Benin.
See also
SWAZIS WANT DEMOCRACY - SURVEY
SEVEN IN TEN SWAZIS GO HUNGRY

T-shirt wearers on terror charge
25 April 2014

Seven members of Swazilands best known pro-democracy party the Peoples United
Democratic Movement (PUDEMO) have been arrested and charged under a terrorism act for
wearing t-shirts and berets with the groups name on them.

24

They were arrested outside the Swazi High Court where they were with other members of the
public who gathered to show support for Bheki Makhubu and Thulani Maseko, who are in
court on contempt charges following the publication of magazine articles that were critical of
the kingdoms judiciary.
PUDEMO is banned under Swazilands controversial Suppression of Terrorism Act (STA)
which has been extensively used against opponents of King Mswati III, who rules Swaziland
as sub-Saharan Africas last absolute monarch.
The Swaziland Solidarity Network (SSN), another prodemocracy group banned under the
STA, reported that seven PUDEMO members were arrested and charged. It named them as
Bongani Gama; Mlungusi Makhanya (the groups Secretary General); Brian Ntshangase (the
groups public relations officer); Mangaliso Khumalo; Bafana Magongo; Ntobeko Maseko
and Size Tsabedze.
The men are expected to appear in court on Monday 28 April 2014.

T-shirt terrorists still in jail
1 May 2014

Seven pro-democracy campaigners arrested on terrorism charges in Swaziland for wearing T-
shirts with a political slogan have been remanded in jail for a further week.

The men, including leaders of PUDEMO, the best-known opposition group in Swaziland,
were arrested outside the Swazi High Court. They were present with members of the public
who had come to offer support to magazine editor Bheki Makhubu and Human Rights
Lawyer Thulani Maseko.

The two men are in the High Court on contempt charges arising from articles they wrote for
the Nation, a small-circulation independent magazine in Swaziland, that were critical of the
Swazi judiciary.

Criticism of the Swazi state is severely curtailed. King Mswati III rules as sub-Saharan
Africas last absolute monarch. He picks the government and the top judges and political
parties are banned from taking part in elections. All political parties that oppose King
Mswati, including PUDEMO, (the Peoples United Democratic Movement) have been
banned as terrorist groups under the Suppression of Terrorism Act.

The seven men, who were remanded in jail by the Swazi High Court until 6 May 2014, are
each charged with four counts of terrorism.

One charge reads that at the High Court and at a bus rank and in a street in the capital
Mbabane they chanted slogans while wearing the white T-shirts with PUDEMO written on
them and reflecting terrorist demands at the back. They also wore red and black PUDEMO
berets.

They are also alleged to have attempted, prepared, and conspired with others to do an act
with seditious intentions.


25

The seven men are PUDEMO Secretary General Mlungisi Makhanya; Public Relations
Officer Brian Clive Ntshangase; Bongani Gama; Bafana Mabandla Magongo; Siza Jabulani
Tsabedze; Ntobeko Gideon Maseko and Mangaliso Simanga Khumalo.

T-shirt terrorists free on bail
5 May 2014

The seven T-shirt terrorists in Swaziland were granted bail of E15,000 (US$1,500) when
they appeared at the Swazi High Court on Monday (5 May 2014).
The seven men had been in jail on remand since 23 April 2014 charged with terrorism
offences because they allegedly wore T-shirts with the name of the banned pro-democracy
group PUDEMO on them and allegedly chanted slogans.
PUDEMO (the Peoples United Democratic Movement) is the best known of several
democracy groups banned as terrorist organisations in Swaziland, where King Mswati III
rules as sub-Saharan Africas last absolute monarch.
At an earlier hearing, High Court Judge Mumcy Dlamini had asked the prosecution to
provide evidence of the chants the PUDEMO members allegedly made but, local media
report, it failed to do so.
Each of the accused men is charged with four counts under the Suppression of Terrorism Act.
The seven men are PUDEMO Secretary General Mlungisi Makhanya; Public Relations
Officer Brian Clive Ntshangase; Bongani Gama; Bafana Mabandla Magongo; Siza Jabulani
Tsabedze; Ntobeko Gideon Maseko and Mangaliso Simanga Khumalo.

Long record of Swazi Police assaults
1 May 2014

Police in the northern Hhohho district of Swaziland have a long record of allegedly assaulting
suspects, a newspaper in the kingdom reported.
The latest man to accuse the police appeared at Piggs Peak Magistrates Court with fresh
facial bruises, the Swazi Observer said.
The accused man was charged with theft and police from Buhleni brought him to court. He
told the court that he had been assaulted by police and named the officers he alleged were
involved.
The Observer reported, This was not the first accused to appear at the Piggs Peak
Magistrates Court with bruises claiming to have been assaulted by the men of the law.
It added, Many accused have claimed they were assaulted by police during questioning for
crimes they have allegedly committed.
One accused claimed that a water pipe was inserted into his mouth by the police and it was
connected to the tap and the water was opened and he almost choked.

26

He claimed that when he had drunk too much water, and was about to pass out the pipe was
removed and he was hit in the gut by an officer and vomited all the water.
The officers then asked him the same questions and he did not answer and the pipe was
inserted again until he had to admit to something he had never done in fear of dying.
The newspaper said police from northern Hhohho had in the past been accused of hitting
suspects in the face, but police from other stations, do not hit their suspects on the face to
conceal evidence when the suspect makes an appearance before court.

May Day leaders arrested
1 May 2014

Democracy leaders in Swaziland were arrested and charged with sedition on Thursday (1
May 2014) during May Day commemorations in the kingdom.

Mario Masuku, President of the Peoples United Democratic Movement (PUDEMO), the
best-known of the opposition groups in Swaziland and Maxwell Dlamini, General-Secretary
of the Swaziland Youth Congress (SWAYOCO), were among pro-democracy campaigners
charged.

They were arrested as part of a renewed clampdown against dissent in the kingdom, ruled by
King Mswati III, sub-Saharan Africas last absolute monarch.

Seven democracy campaigners are in jail on remand since last month accused of terrorist
activities after they were arrested for wearing PUDEMO T-shirts and berets. PUDEMO has
been banned in Swaziland as a terrorist organisation since 2008, under the controversial
Suppression of Terrorism Act.

Magazine editor Bheki Makhubu and human rights lawyer Thulani Maseko are presently on
trial in Swaziland charged with contempt after writing articles for the Nation, a small
circulation magazine, that criticised the Swazi judiciary.

Last month, illegally abducted prodemocracy leaders to prevent them addressing a meeting
calling for freedom in Swaziland.

Thousands of workers turned out to mark May Day across Swaziland. Police were out in
force in Manzini, the main commercial city in Swaziland, where a mass rally took place at the
Salesian Sports Ground.

Democracy leaders jailed on remand
2 May 2014

Two of the Swaziland democracy leaders charged with sedition following May Day
commemorations in the kingdom have been jailed on remand until 9 May 2014.

27

Mario Masuku, President of the Peoples United Democratic Movement (PUDEMO), and
Maxwell Dlamini, Secretary-General of the Swaziland Youth Congress (SWAYOCO), were
accused of uttering seditious statements.
They appeared at Magistrates Court on Friday (2 May 2014) and were remanded in jail.
According to reports from the court published on social media, the two men face four
separate charges arising from a single incident.
The two were arrested following a pro-democracy rally at the Salesian Sports Ground in
Manzini, Swazilands main commercial city.
Local media reported that as many as 7,000 people joined the rallies in Swaziland to mark
May Day, but some democracy leaders were prevented from attending by police.
The Swazi Observer, a newspaper in effect owned by King Mswati III, who is sub-Saharan
Africas last absolute monarch, reported, Masuku was a hit among the workers yesterday. He
was given a heros welcome when he arrived with political activists ignoring the programme
and running all the way to the parking lot to welcome him.
It added, After Masukus speech, Maxwell sang a song which the political activists danced
and toyi-toyied to. He was arrested for this song as the police termed it seditious.
The Times of Swaziland, the only independent daily newspaper in the kingdom, reported
PUDEMOs Second Deputy Secretary-General, Mphandlana Shongwe and Swaziland United
Democratic Front (SUDF) Coordinator Wandile Dludlu were turned back by police officers
and ordered not to set foot in Manzini.
It reported Shongwe was stopped by the police at Moneni where there was a roadblock and
he ordered to return home. He was told he would be arrested if he went into the city.
The Times reported Shongwe said police told him he would experience what Sipho Jele
experienced if he defied their orders. This was a reference to the death in custody four years
ago of Jele, who was arrested on May Day 2010 for wearing a T-shirt supporting a pro-
democracy political party.
The newspaper reported that Dludlu was stopped by the police near Bhunu Mall in Manzini
while driving his vehicle. The newspaper reported him saying the police used violence
against him.
He said, They grabbed me and drove with me to Mbabane in a white Isuzu double-cab,
where they dropped me off at my parental home in Msunduza,
Swazi authorities have clamped down on dissent in the kingdom in recent months.
Seven democracy campaigners have been in jail on remand since last month accused of
terrorist activities after they were arrested for wearing PUDEMO T-shirts and berets.
PUDEMO has been banned in Swaziland as a terrorist organisation since 2008, under the
controversial Suppression of Terrorism Act.

28

Magazine editor Bheki Makhubu and human rights lawyer Thulani Maseko are presently on
trial in Swaziland charged with contempt after writing articles for the Nation, a small
circulation magazine, that criticised the Swazi judiciary.
Last month, police illegally abducted prodemocracy leaders to prevent them addressing a
meeting calling for freedom in Swaziland.


29

4. KING MSWATI AND ROYAL FAMILY

King diverts wealth from his subjects
14 April 2014

Swazilands autocratic King Mswati III holds assets worth E1.39 billion (US$140 million) in
the vast Tibiyo TakaNgwane conglomerate of companies that he owns in trust for the
nation.

Tibiyo made E218 million from its operations in a single year, according to financial results
just published.

Although the King is said to hold the assets for the nation, he in facts uses a substantial
amount of the money to finance his own lavish lifestyle. Swaziland has a population of 1.3
million, people and seven in ten of them live in abject poverty with incomes less than US$2 a
day.
Meanwhile, King Mswati, who rules Swaziland as sub-Saharan Africas last absolute
monarch, has 13 palaces, a private jet, fleets of BMW and Mercedes cars and at least one
Rolls Royce.
The money is also said to finance lavish lifestyles for his family. His 13 wives regularly
enjoy luxury holidays in some of the worlds most glamorous tourist attractions.
Financial results published in the Times Sunday, an independent newspaper in Swaziland,
revealed Tibiyo made E218.1 million in the year ended March 2012. According to the
companys latest financial report, revenue increased by at least 46.6 per cent during that
period.

Profits recorded in 2012 amounted to E116 million.
The Times reported at the end of 2012, Tibiyo had assets worth E1.39 billion.
Tibiyo fully and partly owns 23 major companies operating in the Swazi economy in
manufacturing, property, agriculture, media, mining and tourism industries.
Tibiyo was established by Royal Charter in August 1968 by King Sobhuza II.
Among companies owned or part-owned by Tibiyo are Swaziland Beverages, Parmalat
Swaziland, Dalcrue Agriculture Holdings (Pty) Ltd, Nedbank (Swaziland) Limited,
Swaziland Development and Finance Corporation (FINCORP), the Simunye Plaza, Bhunu
Mall and the Swazi Observer newspaper.
Themba Dlamini, Managing Director (MD) of the company, said Tibiyos cash cow was
largely the sugar cane industry. It has a stake in Ubombo Sugar (40 per cent stake), Royal
Swaziland Sugar Corporation (50 per cent shares) and Inyoni Yami Swaziland Irrigation
Scheme (IYSIS) among others.

30

In a report in 2013, the Institute for Security Studies in South Africa called Tibiyo a closed,
largely secretive, mega entity that accumulates wealth for the monarchy. Through it,
patronage and nepotism are believed to be rewarded.
Swazi people are not allowed to criticise King Mswati, but in 2013, the Communist Party of
Swaziland (CPS) launched a Red October Campaign to cut all his financing. The CPS said in
addition to Tibiyo TakaNgwane, the King he received income from Tisuka Taka Ngwane,
which is a residential and commercial property developer.

Both funds account for some 50 percent of the Swazi economy, CPS said.
Kenneth Kunene, CPS General Secretary, said, That poverty and disease are such blights on
the lives of the Swazi people is directly and incontrovertibly linked to Mswatis sources of
income.
We think it is high time that everything held in trust for the Swazi nation is now handed over
to the people. Mswati has done a bad job at holding it in trust for us. The country needs its
wealth back, and the CPS is calling on people to demand what is theirs.
The Red October Campaign also demanded that the R400 million given to the royal family
each year from the state budget be immediately cancelled.
Mswati and his family are no different than an organized crime syndicate, said Kunene.
And the way you deal with organized crime is to cut off its access to ready cash. That way it
will shrivel up and die. And thats what we want to see happen with the Mswati regime.
See also
KINGDOMS WEALTH STAYS WITH THE KING

King Mswati spends and spends
15 May 2014

Swaziland's King Mswati III has increased his annual household budget for 2014 by more
than 10 percent to US$61m, this is on top of the 13 percent increase he had in 2013.
The spending increases came after the king, who rules Swaziland as sub-Saharan Africas last
absolute monarch, promised his subjects he would freeze his personal budget during the
kingdoms present financial crisis.
The AFP news agency reported on Wednesday (15 May 2014) this years figure also includes
provisions for construction work on palaces that will cost the tax payer about $12.6m.
In October 2012, the then Swaziland Finance Minister Majozi Sithole told international
media the king had asked him to freeze the Royal budget.
In October 2012, the Times of Swaziland reported that Sithole told CNN that the king wanted
to do his bit to help his kingdom that is facing economic meltdown.

31

Sithole was reported by CNN saying, I brief him [the king], he has concerns and he will, as
he did this year, say whatever you work dont even increase my budget because I understand
the fiscal situation.
But, the truth about of the Kings spending has been consistently hidden from the Swazi
people, his budget is never debated in parliament, and audits of the budget are only presented
to the King himself and the Royal Board of Trustees chaired by the minister of finance.

Media in Swaziland had access to the full budget estimates which contained information
about the increase in the kings budget but refused to publish it. State media in the kingdom
are heavily censored and the private media censors itself when reporting about the king.

King Mswati is estimated to have 14 wives and a royal family that is so large nobody is quite
sure of its exact size.
He has taken huge increases in his slice of the Swaziland budget in recent years.
In the Swazi national budget introduced in February 2012 King Mswati and his royal family
received E210 million (US$21 million) a year from the Swazi taxpayer for their own use.
This was the same amount they got in the financial year 2011/12, but was an increase of 23
percent over 2010/11 and a 63 percent compared with what the king took from his subjects in
2009/10.
Observers note that the king has had many chances in the past to cut back on his spending
and reduce the amount of money he takes from his subjects, but so far has in fact increased
his budget, rather than reduced it. In 2011, as Swaziland hurtled towards financial meltdown
Sithole in his budget demanded 10 percent budget cuts (later increased further) from
government departments, but in the same budget the amount of money given to the king
increased by 23 percent.
All this is happening while seven in ten of Swazilands tiny 1.3 million population live in
abject poverty with incomes less than US$2 a day; three in ten are so hungry they are
medically diagnosed as malnourished and the kingdom has the highest rate of HIV infection
in the world.
Despite the poverty of the kingdom, King Mswati continues to live a lavish lifestyle. He has
13 palaces, fleets of top-of-the-range Mercedes and BMW cars and at least one Rolls Royce.
In 2012 he acquired a private jet, estimated to cost US$17 million. He refused to say who had
paid for it, leading to speculation that the money came from public funds.
The king continues to travel abroad in style. In May 2012 he went to London to visit Queen
Elizabeth II for lunch on a trip estimated to cost US$794,500.
The previous year he was in London with a party of 50 people for the wedding of Prince
William and Kate Middlelton, staying at a US$1,000 per night hotel on a trip that was also
estimated to cost US$700 000 for the hire of a private jet to take the king and his party from
Swaziland to the UK.
In 2012 Queen LaMotsa, the second of the kings wives, stayed at a Johannesburg hotel on a
personal trip at a cost of US$60,000 a month.

32

In July 2012, some of the kings 13 wives went on a shopping trip to Las Vegas, where 66
people reportedly stayed in 10 separate villas each costing US$2,400 per night. The party
were reported by South African newspapers to have travelled by private jet which might have
cost US$4.1 million.

In August 2009, five of King Mswatis wives went on a shopping trip through Europe and the
Middle East that cost an estimated US$6 million.
In 2009, Forbes magazine estimated that King Mswati himself had a personal fortune worth
US$200 million. Forbes also said King Mswati is the beneficiary of two funds created by his
father Sobhuza II in trust for the Swazi nation. During his reign, he has absolute discretion
over use of the income. The trust has been estimated to be worth US$10 billion.
King Mswati also holds in trust for the Swazi nation the profits of Tibiyo Taka Ngwane, an
investment fund with extensive shares in a number of businesses, industries, property
developments and tourism facilities in Swaziland. This money is supposed to be used for the
benefit of the people but the vast majority is actually used for the kings own personal use.
See also
NO SACRIFICE FROM KING MSWATI
IMF CALLS FOR SACRIFICE FROM KING

Swazi King third richest in Africa
4 June 2014

King Mswati III of Swaziland is Africas third wealthiest monarch with a personal fortune of
US50 million, even though more than 65 percent of his 1.3 million subjects are forced to
scrape by on less than $1.25 a day, according to new data published by Forbes magazine.
The fortune does not include the estimated US$140 million he holds through the
conglomerate Tibiyo TakaNgwane, that he supposedly holds in trust for the Swazi nation.
King Mswati III, who rules as sub-Saharan Africas last absolute monarch, owns 13 palaces,
a private jet airplane, fleets of Mercedes and BMW cars and at least one Rolls Royce, while
the majority of his subjects rely on some form of food aid to avoid hunger. At least 40
percent of the working population is unemployed.
Forbes, in an analysis of the richest monarchs in Africa reported that the King was more
well known for his relationships with women (he had at least 15 wives at the last count), and
for his flamboyant parties.
It added, He turned 46 recently, with his birthday coinciding with the Christian Easter
holidays. Not willing to share the spotlight with Jesus, King Mswati postponed his birthday
celebrations for five days so that a proper national holiday could be held in his honor.
American R&B artist Erykah Badu performed for the King during the expensive
celebrations, irking thousands of human right activists.

33

Forbes reported, The King is one of Africas wealthiest royals. His personal net worth is at
least $50 million, based on the annual $50 million salary that he is paid out of government
coffers.
He also controls Tibiyo TakaNgwane, an investment holding company that owns stakes in
sugar refining giants Ubombo Sugar and Royal Swaziland Sugar Corporation (RSSC), dairy
company Parmalat Swaziland, spirits manufacturer Swaziland Beverages and hotel chain
Swazi Spa Holdings. The company has assets worth over $140 million, but he holds it in trust
for the people of Swaziland.
This is not the first time Forbes has reported on the King. In 2012, Forbes named King
Mswati as one of the top five worse rulers in Africa.
It reported the King ruled over a kingdom which has one of the worlds highest HIV
prevalence rates: ver 35 percent of adults. Its average life expectancy is the lowest in the
world at 33 years; nearly 70 percent of the countrys citizens live on less than $1 a day and 40
percent are unemployed.
It added, But for all the suffering of the Swazi people, King Mswati has barely shown
concern or interest.
He lives lavishly, using his kingdoms treasury to fund his expensive tastes in German
automobiles, first-class leisure trips around the world and women. But his gross
mismanagement of his countrys finances is now having dire economic consequences.
Swaziland is going through a severe fiscal crisis.
The kingdoms economy is collapsing and pensions have been stopped. In June last year, the
King begged for a financial bailout from South Africa.
In 2009, Forbes named King Mswati among the top 15 wealthiest royals in the whole world.

Schoolbook reveals royal family rift
1 May 2014

The Swaziland Government, which decides what can and cannot be taught in schools, has
approved a history syllabus and book documenting the early history of PUDEMO, an
organisation now banned in the kingdom as terrorists, and the power struggle inside the
Royal Family that won King Mswati III the throne.

The Times Sunday, part of Swazilands only independent group of newspapers, said the book
called Swaziland in Focus was explosive.
According to the Times, the book chronicles how the Peoples United Democratic
Movement (PUDEMO) was formed at the height of deadly infighting within the royal
family. This was during the 1980s when supporters of Mswati III, the present King and sub-
Saharan Africas last absolute monarch, won a power struggle to win the throne.
The book, aimed at pupils in forms four and five, was previously banned from Swazi schools.
The Times reported the reason the book was originally banned, was mainly that the books
narration on PUDEMO was not relevant to the history of Swaziland, especially because the

34

party was a banned entity. It had been declared a terrorist organisation in 2008, following the
enactment of the controversial Suppression of Terrorism Act.
The book details how after the death of King Sobhuza II in 1982 there was a long power
struggle for his succession, which was won by the present king, Mswati III in 1986.
Today, many supporters of King Mswati claim that he was chosen by God. In fact, he was
chosen by a political group plotting within the ruling elite who expected him to give them
favours once he took the throne.
Percy Simelane, the Swazi Government spokesperson, told the Times he had read the book
but had found inaccuracies, which the newspaper reported he said would need to be
reviewed.
Timothy Velabo Mtetwa, the Ludzidzini Governor, who is known as the traditional prime
minister, and is generally considered to have more power in Swaziland than the nominal PM,
Barnabas Dlamini, told the newspaper, I cannot give my opinion on the events that are
documented there but we trust that if government has approved it, then it is okay.
See also
PLOTS, INTRIGUE AND THE SWAZI KING

How Swazi King Mswati was made
2 May 2014

A lot of people in Swaziland believe that God chose King Mswati III to be king.

And, because of this divine intervention, the king has special abilities and wisdom. For that
reason, his word must be obeyed. Those who speak against the King, speak also against God.

Well thats the theory. And it is very convenient for those close to the power of the King to
allow this falsehood to gather ground in Swaziland. After all, some people might want to
criticise a King, but who can dare criticise a God?

Of course, King Mswati wasnt chosen by God. A political group plotting within the ruling
elite of Swaziland chose him.
Unlike in many societies that still have monarchs, in Swaziland the eldest child (often only
the son is eligible) of a deceased monarch doesnt simply become king once the reigning
monarch dies. In Swaziland, the King is said to be chosen by virtue of the rank and character
of his mother in accordance with Swazi law and custom.
But the part of Swazi law and custom relating to the selection of a successor to a king is
unknown to a majority of ordinary Swazi.
The story of how King Mswati, who was known as Prince Makhosetive as a child, became
the monarch goes like this, according to one biography.

35

King Sobhuza II had deftly managed to hold rivalling power factions within the royal ruling
alliance in check, and so his death in August 1982, left a power vacuum.
At this time Makhosetive was 15 years old and a schoolboy at Sherborne in England.
In keeping with tradition, Makhosetives appointment by his father was not publicly
announced. Before his death the King had chosen one of his queens, the childless Princess
Dzeliwe, to preside over the monarchy as regent until the prince turned 21 years of age.
It was in keeping with tradition that she be childless, so that she would not involve herself in
a factional struggle to advance the position of her own son. Factional quarrels broke out into
the open, however, in the interregnum period, while the prince was [at school] in the United
Kingdom.
Continuing disputes led members of the Liqoqo, a supreme traditional advisory body, to
force the Queen Regent to resign. In her stead the Liqoqo appointed Queen Ntombi, Prince
Makhosetives mother, who initially refused to take up the position.
Further disputes between royal factions led to his coronation as King Mswati III, at the age of
18, in April 1986, three years earlier than expected.
At the time, the King was the youngest monarch in the world.
Observers saw the early coronation as an attempt on the part of the Liqoqo to legitimate the
usurpation of Dzeliwe and consolidate their gains in power. Prince Makhosetive, now King
Mswati III, acted quickly however to disband the Liqoqo and call for parliamentary elections.
In May 1986 Mswati dismissed the Liqoqo, the traditional advisory council to regents, which
had assumed greater powers than were customary. In July 1986 he dismissed and charged
with treason Prime Minister Prince Bhekimpi and several government officials for their role
in the ejection of Queen Regent Dzeliwe, though he eventually pardoned those who were
convicted.
Another biography of King Mswati says, King Mswatis first two years of rule were
characterized by a continuing struggle to gain control of the government and consolidate his
rule.
Immediately following his coronation, Mswati disbanded the Liqoqo and revised his cabinet
appointments. In October 1986 Prime Minister Bhekimpi Dlamini was dismissed and for the
first time a nonroyal, Sotsha Dlamini, was chosen for the post.
Prince Bhekimpi and 11 other important Swazi figures were arrested in June 1987. [Prince]
Mfanasibili, [Prince] Bhekimpi, and eight others were convicted of high treason. Eight of
those convicted, however, were eventually pardoned.
In 2011, court papers relating to the treason trial that was held in secret come to light after 23
years. The papers that had been deliberately removed from Swaziland after the trial in 1987
were unearthed in Namibia.

36

They have not been released to the public and might contain details about the plotting that
surrounded King Mswatis rise to power. The papers might also remind the Kings subjects
that he is really only where he is today because of political intrigue.

Monday, 2 June 2014
Top Kings aide Prince Logcogco dies

Prince Mangaliso Logcogco, one of King Mswati IIIs most trusted lieutenants, who was at
the centre of a child-sex scandal, has died aged 67.
Prince Logcogco, described in Swaziland as a senior prince, was chair of the shady Kings
Advisory Council, also known as Liqoqo, that operates on behalf of King Mswati, who rules
Swaziland as sub-Saharan Africas last absolute monarch. He was also chair of Tibiyo
TakaNgwane, the conglomerate that is in effect owned by the King.
Prince Logcogco had a long history as an anti-democrat. In 2012, he supported King Mswati
when he overturned the Swazi Constitution and refused to sack his Prime Minister and
Government after the House of Assembly had legitimately passed a vote of no confidence.
According to the constitution, the King was obliged to dismiss the government, but he
refused to do so.
In 2011, Prince Logcogco called for a state of emergency to be declared to tackle the on-
going economic crisis in the kingdom. This would have been an act against the Swazi
constitution and among other things would have allowed the state to impose wage cuts on
public servants without consultation with trade unions.
To justify taking power, he claimed, incorrectly, that the International Monetary Fund (IMF)
had advised the government to declare the state of emergency.
In 2010, Prince Logcogco made international headlines when it was revealed he had fathered
a child with a girl when she was aged 13 or 14. Calls from child protection agencies and other
NGOs for him to be investigated fell on deaf ears.
At the time the Swaziland Democracy Campaign (SDC) asked the Swazi Police to investigate
the prince over allegations that he committed statutory rape.
The SDC said the girl was legally a minor (under the age of 16) who was in no position to
legally consent to sex with a man old enough to be her grandfather.
He also faced allegations that he sexually abused the four-year girl he had fathered.
In 2010, the Swaziland Solidarity Network reported, Logcogco is a polygamist whose
number of wives is unknown. He also has numerous children out of wedlock, many of whom
he has no personal relationship with. Like his cousin, King Mswati, he still holds on to
backward views of expressing his manhood through his virility. The existence of such
attitudes amongst people who are role models to the countrys youth is disturbing and goes a

37

long way towards explaining why the country currently has the highest [HIV] infection rate
in the whole world.
On Monday (2 June 2014), Tibiyo TakaNgwane Managing Director Themba Dlamini told the
Swazi Observer, a newspaper in effect owned by the King, Swaziland had lost a gallant
prince who had left remarkable deeds behind.
Prince Logcogco reportedly died at a hospital in South Africa.
See also
INVESTIGATE PRINCE FOR CHILD SEX
CHILD SEX PRINCE NOT SCARED OF HIV
EVEN KING MSWATI ATTACKS LOGCOGCO
KING'S MAN AND STATE OF EMERGENCY


38

5. MEDIA
Social media first with the news
4 April 2014

Social media in Swaziland are beating mainstream media to the punch in the coverage of the
arrest and jailing of a magazine editor and a human rights lawyer.
Bheki Makhubu, editor of the Nation magazine and Thulani Maseko were arrested on 17
March 2014 and charged with contempt of court for writing articles in the magazine critical
of the Swazi judiciary and Chief Justice Michael Ramodibedi in particular.
Posts on social media, especially Facebook and Twitter, told the world of the arrests almost
as they happened and posters have been following the case every step of the way as the two
accused appear in court, seemingly day after day.
The posts alerted human rights organisations in Swaziland and across the world to the plight
of the two men. Within hours condemnations of Swaziland, which is ruled by King Mswati
III, sub-Saharan Africas last absolute monarch, were transmitted across the world. Amnesty
International immediately named Makhubu and Maseko prisoners of conscience.
The articles, originally published in the Nation, which has a tiny circulation in Swaziland,
were posted on the Internet ensuring that many more people had the chance to read them than
would have been the case.
Mainstream media outside of Swaziland quickly followed up on the stories and now the case
of Makhubu and Maseko is international news.
Within Swaziland, the Media Institute of Southern Africa (MISA) reported that state
broadcast media, which are almost every radio and television station in the kingdom, have
ignored the case.
MISA reported, It must be said that the broadcast media in Swaziland is more censored than
the print media and operates under a greater internalised fear of the authorities. The
government has in place Public Service Announcement Guidelines for the state-controlled
TV and radio, which among many other measures that restrict free speech, requires people to
get approval from their local chief before issuing a statement.
There are only two newspaper groups in Swaziland, the Swazi Observer, described by MISA
in its annual report on press freedom in Swaziland as propaganda for the Swazi Royal
Family and the independent Times of Swaziland. Both have given extensive coverage to the
trail of the two accused, but neither have given their readers details of what they have
supposed to have done, beyond reporting they are on contempt of court charges.
The newspapers live in fear of reprisals from the state if they overstep the mark and criticise
the judiciary, who are handpicked by King Mswati.
The Times Sunday refused to publish a comment article written by its regular columnist Musa
Hlophe, himself a human rights activist, for fear of retribution. The unpublished article was
subsequently published on the Swazi Media Commentary blogsite and shared extensively on

39

Facebook. The Mail and Guardian newspaper in South Africa later published it on its own
website.
Social media sites were also the first to report the news that the US Ambassador to Swaziland
Makila James had attended the Swazi High Court to offer her support to the two accused. The
US Embassy had previously roundly criticised the Swazi authorities for the arrests. Social
media reported James saying that the court case would have an implication in an investigation
the US is undertaking on human rights in Swaziland. If improvements are not made by 15
May 2014, Swaziland risks losing its preferred trading status with the US under the AGOA
agreement. This could risk 20,000 jobs in the textile industry in Swaziland.
Social media is fast becoming an essential vehicle for finding out the truth about what is
going on in Swaziland. More and more ordinary people as well as established democracy
advocates are taking to the Internet to get the message out.
It probably will not stop with the Makhubu and Maseko case. On 12 April, Swazi activists
will mark the anniversary of the 1973 Royal Proclamation that turned Swaziland from a
parliamentary democracy to an autocratic kingdom ruled by decree. We can expect to get a
more complete picture of the anti-government and anti-monarchy activities on that day from
social media than ever we can from Swazilands mainstream media.
See also
EDITOR IS A SECRET SECURITY RISK

Swazi people speak up for themselves
1 May 2014

Social media users are once again bringing news of human rights violations in Swaziland to
the attention of the world.
This time the world-famous hip-hop and soul singer Erykah Badu is their target.
People are angry because Badu sang Happy Birthday at a private party for King Mswati III,
sub-Saharan Africas last absolute monarch, and then gave him a lucky stone and a US$100
note as a gift.
The Swazi King rules his kingdom with an iron grip and while he lives in luxury with 13
palaces, fleets of Mercedes cars, and a private jet airplane, seven in ten of his 1.3 million
subjects live in abject poverty on less than US$2 a day. Forbes magazine once reported King
Mswati had a personal fortune of US$200 million.
King Mswatis grip on power in his kingdom is so great that at present editor Bkheki
Makhubu and human rights lawyer Thulani Maseko are on trial in Swaziland for contempt of
court after calling the independence of the Swazi judicial system into question in articles in a
small circulation magazine, the Nation.
Also, seven people are in jail awaiting trial for wearing T-shirts supporting the pro-
democracy group PUDEMO.

40

It was against this background that people rushed to their Twitter and Facebook accounts to
condemn Badu, who in the past has been a vocal supporter of human rights. Mainstream
media quickly picked up on the story and it went global.
Badu was so stung by the criticism that she went on Twitter to defend herself. She refused to
apologise, saying, I cant be held responsible for the situation in the kingdom because I
signed up as an artist, not as a political activist.
Groups supporting the call for human rights in Swaziland joined in. Human Rights
Foundation director of institutional affairs, Alex Gladstein, in a press release said, She
claims to want to improve the lives of the disenfranchised and impoverished, but
unapologetically does favors for a corrupt tyrant who jails those who challenge his ill-gotten
wealth and power. She should be the first in line asking the king to release Makhubu and
Maseko.
The authenticity of Badus philanthropic efforts is called into question by her celebration of
Mswati.

He added, The king is a kleptocrat who lives in the lap of obscene luxury while most of his
countrymen toil in abject poverty for less than $2 a day. Badus performance for him is a slap
in the face of all human rights defenders inside Swaziland and is a mockery of Badus work
inside the US.
Social media is being increasingly used by supporters of democracy in Swaziland, by-passing
mainstream media in the kingdom, all of which supports the monarchy. Activists have been
Tweeting each day from the Swazi High Court as the trial of Makhubu and Maseko
continues. They have also drawn the worlds attention to human rights violations concerning,
among other things, violence against women, discrimination against gays and lesbians, ill
treatment of juvenile prisoners and the rape of young girls.

Newspaper sacks Qalakaliboli Dlamini
24 April 2014

Qalakaliboli Dlamini, the Swaziland journalist whose articles attacked gays and called
battered women bitches, has been sacked by his newspaper.
But, he was not sacked for his articles, even though they caused a storm of protest from
readers.
Instead, he was dismissed because of comments he made on his Facebook page about the
Times Sunday, the newspaper that employed him.
Qalakaliboli Dlamini, aged 41, whose real name is Musawenkhosi Dlamini, became
notorious during 2012 for articles he wrote for the newspaper.
Among his targets were battered women. In December 2012 he wrote that they were bitches
and said most women who were beaten up by men brought it upon themselves.
After the publication of the article a range of organisations, among them the Swaziland
Action Group Against Abuse (SWAGAA), Swaziland Coalition of Concerned Civic

41

Organizations, Coordinating Assembly for Non-Governmental Organisations (CANGO),
Swaziland Concerned Church Leaders, Swaziland National Association of Teachers,
Swaziland Positive Living and the Swaziland Agricultural Producers Union (SAPU), called
for an apology.

Makila James, the US Ambassador to Swaziland, also publicly backed readers who
complained about the article.
The newspaper refused to apologise. Instead, the newspapers readers representative ruled
that Dlamini had a right to his views.
Readers boycotted buying the newspaper in protest.
In May 2012, Dlamini was briefly suspended by the Times Sunday after he wrote an article
attacking homosexuals as satanic and evil. In the article he said, I hate homosexuality
with every fibre of hair or flesh in my body.
The article received what Times Sunday editor Innocent Maphalala called an unprecedented
number of complaints.
At the time, Dlamini responded to his critics saying, I am not at all apologetic for my choice
of words.

He added, I will continue to stand up against homosexuals and if need be, I will run a public
anti-homosexual campaign.
His sacking was not the result of readers complaints. Times Sunday editor Innocent
Maphalala, writing in his own newspaper, said Dlamini was dismissed because while writing
for us, he used Facebook to disparage management and staff of the Times Group of
Newspapers.
He also had many unkind words to say about our other columnists like the respected Musa
Hlophe and the likeable Bundu Teacher.
He added, We were alerted to this by Facebook users who wondered what was going on
because they thought we were one big happy family, especially after I defended Qalakaliboli
a year or so ago, when everybody was against him for bashing women and gays in his
articles.
Dlaminis sacking took place in January 2014, but has only now become public. Maphalala
said this was because Dlamini had been writing comments on his Facebook page which were
detrimental to the image of the Times Sunday, in particular, and the Times Group of
Newspapers in general.
He added, I view his behaviour as unprofessional and have sent email messages, privately
warning him to stop. He has not.
See also
THE TIMES AND PRESS STANDARDS
GAY HATE JOURNALIST UNREPENTANT

42

Govts vice-like grip on broadcasting
8 May 2014

The Government in Swaziland has a vice-like grip on broadcast media in the kingdom and
nearly all radio content is censored, a report just published said.
No announcement that is negative or does not support the Governments agenda is allowed,
the Media Institute of Southern Africa (MISA) revealed.
In an overview of media freedom in 2013, MISA said in Swaziland Swazi TV and the state
radio Swaziland Broadcasting and Information Services (SBIS), act as government
propaganda mouthpieces.
It added, the only privately-owned TV channel in Swaziland, Channel Swazi (Channel S),
has not added much value in terms of media diversity or independence.
It added, Channel Swazi has only survived by outdoing the state-owned broadcasters in
kowtowing to the authorities and influential people. Owing to severe State and self-
censorship, when criticism is offered by much of the media it is often offered in defence of
the King.
King Mswati III rules Swaziland as sub-Saharan Africas last absolute monarch. Political
parties cannot contest elections in the kingdom and most are banned outright. Pro-democracy
campaigners are harassed and imprisoned and freedom of speech and assembly is severely
curtailed.
In its report called So This is Democracy? MISA reported, Government maintained its vice-
like grip on the state-controlled broadcast media.
Members of parliament and government ministers were prevented from speaking on state
radio and TV by the Prime Minister, Barnabas Dlamini. He used the Public Service
Announcement (PSA) Guidelines for broadcasting to ban any announcement that is negative
or does not support the Governments agenda.
MISA reported, The government invoked the PSA guidelines not only to suppress dissenting
voices but also to suppress the voices of Members of Parliament in the State broadcasters.
The legislators felt the guidelines were meant to frustrate them as they were accused of using
radio to campaign.
The ban imposed during election campaigns drove MP Masende Zwane to tears as he
pleaded with the PM to lift it, claiming it frustrated progress and the free flow of
information.
MP Zwane was stopped from making public announcements on State radio. The head of
government did not budge an inch.
The ban also affected ministers who were told to slow down on the usage of national radio in
the lead up to the national elections. According to Deputy Prime Minister Themba Masuku

43

this was done to avoid a situation where some people would have unfair advantage, because
not everyone would have access to national radio.
Ministers were only allowed to speak on official business. Even before then, they would
have to seek permission from the deputy prime ministers office. These measures effectively
gagged election candidates in the broadcast media.


44

6. SIKHUPHE (KING MSWATI III) AIRPORT
Public banned from Kings new airport
9 April 2014

The Swazi public have been banned from visiting the new King Mswati III Airport in
Swaziland in case they wear out floor tiles in the passenger lounge.
The no-visitors directive has been issued by the Swaziland Civil Aviation Authority
(SWACAA). The airport, formerly known as Sikhuphe, was opened in March 2014, but no
commercial flights have used it and none are planned.
The cost so far of the airport is E3 billion (US$300 million), much of the money came from
the Swazi taxpayer.
King Mswati III, who rules Swaziland as sub-Saharan Africas last absolute monarch, issued
a directive that the airport should remain in sublime condition.
The Times Sunday, an independent newspaper in Swaziland and a critic of the building of the
airport, reported SWACAA Director Solomon Dube saying the airport was not a museum or
a mall. He also said visitors were banned for security reasons.
The newspaper reported him saying, Everyone should cool down and stay away from the
airport for now. This arrangement goes in line with the call from His Majesty the King, who
said it should be kept in sublime condition.
Dube said letting people into the facility could cause damage to some parts of the
infrastructure, such as the ceramic tiles on the floor for the building.
Ceramic tiles are expensive and their disproportionate use could damage them and it would
cost us a lot of money to replace them. We also do not want the structure to age before
passengers and airlines even use it, he said.
The airport is under 24-hour guard by the Royal Swaziland Police who worked with private
security firms to ensure that anxious visitors who were excited by the structure were kept out
of the facility, the Times reported.
The airport, dubbed King Mswatis vanity project, needs about 400,000 passengers a year to
break even.
See also
KINGS AIRPORT STILL HAS NO LICENCE

King Mswati snubs his own airport
8 May 2014

King Mswati III of Swaziland snubbed the newly-opened airport that bears his name and
landed his private jet at the old Matsapha Airport on his return from a trip to Qatar.

45

The King opened the airport, formerly known as Sikhuphe, and widely regarded by his critics
as a personal vanity project, in early March 2014, but since then no commercial airline has
landed at the airport and none has agreed to use it in future.
King Mswati said the airport, which has been built in the wilderness of south-east Swaziland
at a cost of at least E3 billion (US$300 million) was a first-world facility.
Members of the public have been banned from visiting the airport for security reasons,
according to the Swaziland Civil Aviation Authority (SWACAA). SWACAA Director
Solomon Dube said the King wanted people to stay away so the airport could remain in
sublime condition.
No reason has been given by King Mswati why he did not use the new airport on his trip to
Qatar.
However, there are doubts about whether the airport has a licence to operate. In late March
2014, after the King had opened the airport the Regional Director of the International Civil
Aviation Organisation (ICAO), Meshesha Belayneh, told the Open Society Initiative for
Southern Africa (OSISA) in South Africa that Swaziland still needed to follow due process
before the ICAO could issue a licence for the new airport.
The Swazi airport has been dubbed King Mswatis vanity project by critics. King Mswati
rules Swaziland as sub-Saharan Africas last absolute monarch. The King has 13 palaces and
a personal fortune once estimated by Forbes Magazine to be US$200 million. Meanwhile,
seven in ten of his subjects live in abject poverty with an income of less than US$2 a day.
Swaziland has the highest rate of HIV infection in the world.
See also
PRESS ATTACK ON AIRPORT CORRUPTION
AIRPORT TERMINAL CAN'T HANDLE TRAFFIC

Bizarre claims for Kings airport
26 May 2014

Apologists for the newly-opened, but as yet unused, King Mswati III Airport in Swaziland
are going to extraordinary lengths to talk up the value of the project, dubbed by critics the
Kings vanity project.

Leading the charge is the Swazi Observer group of newspapers that is in effect owned by the
King.
The Sunday Observer (25 May 2014) claimed the airport was a heat (presumably it meant a
hit) in Botswana. It then manufactured a story claiming that government ministers from all
over Africa, who were in Botswana for the ANOCA games, praised the standards of the
airport.
In fact, it only quoted one of them, Sudans Minister of Sports, who admitted he had never
been to the airport and had never even visited Swaziland.

46

The Observer is one of the cheerleaders for the airport, formerly known as Sikhuphe, which
was officially opened in March 2014. No commercial airline has flown in or out of the
airport, and none have said they plan to do so in the future.
Even King Mswati himself does not use the airport, built at a cost of at least E3 billion
(US$300 million) in a wilderness in southeast Swaziland. He prefers to fly his private jet
from the Matsapha Airport, which is close to both the kingdoms capital, Mbabane, and the
main commercial city, Manzini.
This is not the only time recently that the Swazi Observer has misled its readers about the
potential of the airport.
On13 May 2014 it quoted Swaziland Civil Aviation Authority (SWACAA) Corporate Affairs
Director Sabelo Dlamini saying was being discussed to fly passengers from Swaziland to
Durban, South Africa, for onward flights to Germany and the United Kingdom. The
newspaper ignored the fact that Swazi people wishing to fly to those European destinations
can already do so via Johannesburg.
Dlamini has made extravagant claims about the potential of the airport in the past. In May
2011, the Weekend Observer reported him saying, We have established possible routes
which we want to market to the operators. Some of the proposed routes from Sikhuphe are
Durban, Cape Town, Lanseria Airport in Sandton, Harare and Mozambique. But nothing has
happened since.
Dlamini also claimed at the time that he met with at least five big airline operators. The
newspaper only named three of them; Knysla Tour Operators, Timeless Ethiopia and Satoa
Tours. None of them were big airline operators and since 2011 nothing has been heard
again about them.
In January 2014, SWACAA placed an advertisement in newspapers in Swaziland claiming,
Two airlines have confirmed operations at Sikhuphe. It did not name them, but did say there
would be flights to Johannesburg, Durban and Cape Town in South Africa and to Maputo in
Mozambique. Nothing has been heard since.
As recently as October 2013, a report from the International Air Transport Association
(IATA) said Sikhuphe International Airport was widely perceived as a vanity project
because of its scale and opulence compared with the size and nature of the market it seeks to
serve.
In June 2013, an engineers report was published by to the Mail and Guardian newspaper in
South Africa saying the structure of the airport was defected and large jet airlines would not
be able to land,
No independent study on the need for Sikhuphe Airport was ever undertaken and the main
impetus behind its construction has been King Mswati. He believes the airport will lend
credibility to his dream to make Swaziland a First World nation by 2022.
In 2003, the International Monetary Fund said Sikhuphe should not be built because it would
divert funds away from much needed projects to fight poverty in Swaziland. About seven in
ten of King Mswatis 1.3 million subjects live in abject poverty, with incomes of less than
US$2 per day. Swaziland has the highest rate of HIV infection in the world. The King has 13

47

palaces and a personal fortune once estimated by Forbes Magazine to be US$200 million.
Meanwhile, seven in ten of his subjects live in abject poverty with an income of less than
US$2 a day.

Swaziland already has an airport at Matsapha, which carries an estimated 70,000 passengers a
year.


48

7. AGOA

Swazi human rights record kills AGOA
16 May 2014

Swaziland has been excluded from a lucrative trade deal with the United States because of its
abysmal record on human rights.

The United States announced on Thursday (15 May 2014) that the kingdom, ruled by King
Mswati III, sub-Saharan Africas last absolute monarch, had failed to retain its status under
the Africa Growth Opportunity Act (AGOA). This means the kingdom will no longer receive
preferential access to the US market.

US ambassador to Swaziland, Malika James said Swaziland had not fulfilled all the
requirements of the programme, including respect for human rights.

Swaziland is allowed duty free trade with the US, which is used mainly for textile exports.
However this arrangement will now lapse in January 2015. About 17,000 jobs in the textile
industry may be under threat as a result.

James said in February 2014 that Swaziland had been given eight years to comply with the
requirements but nothing significant had happened. The US set a deadline of 15 May 2014
for reforms to be made.

The US wanted Swaziland to implement the full passage of amendments to the Industrial
Relations Act; full passage of amendments to the Suppression of Terrorism Act (STA); full
passage of amendments to the Public Order Act; full passage of amendments to sections 40
and 97 of the Industrial Relations Act relating to civil and criminal liability to union leaders
during protest actions; and establishing a code of conduct for the police during public
protests.

James said that there needed to be greater accountability of the police force in Swaziland.
There is a need to give police better guidance so they can do proper law enforcement.
International organisations have over the past year highlighted numerous human rights abuses
in Swaziland.

In July 2013, AfriMAP, a group that monitors and promotes good governance, reported, The
current form of governance in Swaziland is a complete anathema to the conventional wisdom
that prevails in almost all AU [African Union] member states, and certainly in SADC [South
African Development Community]; the issue of dictatorships, absolutism and total state
control of the citizenry is a forgotten and unacceptable notion; which is why Swaziland
government must realize that it cannot delay political reforms, since it will only undermine its
credibility, delay progress, economic and social development of the very people it is
supposed to uplift and protect.
A report on human rights in Swaziland, published in 2013 by the US State Department
revealed, The three main human rights abuses [in 2012] were police use of excessive force,

49

including use of torture, beatings, and unlawful killings; restrictions on freedoms of
association, assembly, and speech; and discrimination and abuse of women and children.
Other human rights problems included arbitrary arrests and lengthy pretrial detention;
arbitrary interference with privacy and home; prohibitions on political activity and
harassment of political activists; trafficking in persons; societal discrimination against
members of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) community and persons with
albinism; harassment of labor leaders; child labor; mob violence; and restrictions on worker
rights.
In general perpetrators acted with impunity, and the government took few or no steps to
prosecute or punish officials who committed abuses.
In May 2013, in its annual report on Swaziland, Amnesty International reported, rights to
freedom of expression, association and peaceful assembly continued to be violated in the
kingdom. There were also arbitrary arrests and excessive force used to crush political
protests, the report stated, and torture and other ill-treatment remained a persistent concern
in Swaziland.
Amnesty noted that in May 2012 the African Commission on Human Rights adopted a
resolution expressing alarm at the Swazi Governments failure to implement previous
decisions and recommendations of the Commission relating to the rights of freedom of
expression, association, and assembly.
These violations included the use by police of, rubber bullets, tear gas and batons to break up
demonstrations and gatherings viewed as illegal.
In April 2013, the Open Society Initiative for Southern Africa (OSISA) reported that recently
Swaziland police and state security forces had shown increasingly violent and abusive
behaviour that was leading to the militarization of the kingdom.

OSISA told the African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights (ACHPR) meeting in
The Gambia, There are also reliable reports of a general militarization of the country through
the deployment of the Swazi army, police and correctional services to clamp down on any
peaceful protest action by labour or civil society organisations ahead of the countrys
undemocratic elections.
In April 2013, the Swaziland United Democratic Front (SUDF) and the Swaziland
Democracy Campaign (SDC), two organiastions campaigning for democracy in the kingdom,
in a joint statement said police in Swaziland were now a private militia with the sole
purpose of serving the Royal regime. This was after about 80 armed officers broke up a
public meeting to discuss the lack of democracy in the kingdom.
See also

KINGDOM FACES HUMAN RIGHTS PROBE
US PRESSURE FOR SWAZI REFORMS

Confusion over kingdoms AGOA status
20 May 2014

50

There is confusion surrounding the United States announcement on the future of Swazilands
status under the African Growth and Opportunities Act (AGOA).
On Friday (16 May 2014) the AFP news agency reported Makila James, the US Ambassador
to Swaziland, saying the kingdom had lost its status because it failed to meet five conditions
relating to workers and human rights.

Swaziland had been given until 15 May 2014 to comply or risk losing AGOA status, which
allows Swazi goods to be sold in the United States under preferential terms.

But, the following day media in Swaziland reported that James denied talking to the AFP.
The Observer on Saturday, a newspaper in effect owned by King Mswati III, reported Ruth
Newman the Swaziland US Embassy spokesperson, saying, I have checked with her [the
Ambassador] and she is surprised where AFP got the report, because they never called her in
the first place. The quote attributed to her, were not hers.
Newman was also reported saying, There is no decision yet.
The Swazi News, an independent newspaper, reported Newman saying a statement on
Swazilands AGOA status would be made, when they are ready.
A press conference due to be held by the US Embassy on Monday (19 May 2014) to make
the announcement was called off at the last minute. No reason for the cancellation or
alternative date for the announcement was given.
The United States had given Swaziland, which is ruled by King Mswati III, sub-Saharan
Africas last absolute monarch, an ultimatum to implement the full passage of amendments to
the Industrial Relations Act; full passage of amendments to the Suppression of Terrorism Act
(STA); full passage of amendments to the Public Order Act; full passage of amendments to
sections 40 and 97 of the Industrial Relations Act relating to civil and criminal liability to
union leaders during protest actions; and establishing a code of conduct for the police during
public protests.
It appears the Swaziland Government has failed to meet the requirements and it is widely
anticipated that when the announcement is made it will say Swaziland will lose its AGOA
benefits from the start of 2015.

An editorial in the Swazi Observer, another newspaper in effect owned by the King, on
Monday (19 May 2014) said, it was just a matter of time, before AGOA benefits would be
lost.
It added, We are also aware that the AGOA axe has been hovering above our heads for some
time.
An editorial in the Times Sunday, an independent newspaper, gave two reasons why the
Swazi Government was to blame for the loss of AGOA. It said, One; for the first time in the
history of Cabinet, we had ministers in office who were highly incompetent to a point of
costing thousands of people their jobs. Two; there never was any intention to meet the

51

demands in the first place, because retaining the status quo supersedes the livelihood of
thousands of citizens or even the Constitution.
In Swaziland the Government is not elected, it is hand-picked by King Mswati.

Swaziland loses US trade benefits
30 June 2014

After one false start it is now official: Swaziland has lost its preferential trading status with
the United States.

US President Barack Obama announced on Thursday (26 June 2014) that the kingdom would
lose its benefits under the African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA).

He said this was because Swaziland was not making continual progress in enacting civil,
political and workers rights.

Swaziland is not a democracy and is ruled by King Mswati III, who is sub-Saharan Africas
last absolute monarch.

In a statement, a White House spokesperson said, The decision to withdraw Swazilands
AGOA eligibility comes after years of engaging with the Government of the Kingdom of
Swaziland on concerns about its implementation of the AGOA eligibility criteria related to
worker rights.

The statement said after an extensive review the US, concluded that Swaziland had not
demonstrated progress on the protection of internationally recognized worker rights. In
particular, Swaziland has failed to make continual progress in protecting freedom of
association and the right to organize. Of particular concern is Swazilands use of security
forces and arbitrary arrests to stifle peaceful demonstrations, and the lack of legal recognition
for labor and employer federations.

US Trade Representative Michael Froman, said, The withdrawal of AGOA benefits is not a
decision that is taken lightly.

We have made our concerns very clear to Swaziland over the last several years and we
engaged extensively on concrete steps that Swaziland could take to address the concerns. We
hope to continue our engagement with the Government of the Kingdom of Swaziland on
steps it can take so that worker and civil society groups can freely associate and assemble and
AGOA eligibility can be restored.

AGOA is a US preferential trade programme that provides duty-free access to the $3 trillion
US market for thousands of products from eligible sub-Saharan African countries.

Media in Swaziland have predicted that as many as 20,000 jobs in the kingdoms textile
industry could be lost as a result of the withdrawal of AGOA benefits that comes into force
on 1 January 2015. The textile industry in Swaziland is dominated by Taiwanese companies
which were drawn to the kingdom by the availability of cheap labour and the AGOA
agreement.


52

In May 2014 Media reported that Swaziland had lost its AGOA status, quoting US
Ambassador to Swaziland, Malika James as a source. She later denied making a statement.


53

8. ECONOMY

Minister misleads over IMF support
14 May 2014

Swazilands Minister of Finance Martin Dlamini misled the people of the kingdom and the
global community when he claimed the International Monetary Fund (IMF) had given
Swaziland an almost clean bill of health on its economy.

He was reacting in local media to the latest IMF statement following its recent mission visit
to Swaziland.

In fact, the IMF statement issued on 12 May 2014 said the opposite. It said Swazilands
challenges were significant.

It said in particular that, the economy has suffered from weak growth performance, which
adversely affects social developments. Furthermore, there are risks to Swazilands economic
prospects, in particular the uncertain global and regional economic outlook that could lower
SACU [Southern Africa Customs Union] revenues.

It went on say that Swaziland should make reforms to its public sector, by which it meant
reduce the amount of money spent on public servants salaries.

To help implement the prudent fiscal policy, the mission also encourages the authorities to
enhance efforts for public sector reforms and public financial management reforms, while
welcoming further efforts to enhance tax administration, it said.

It also said Swaziland had weak growth performance, adding, This weak performance has
been largely associated with low private sector development (depressed private investment in
particular).

It concluded, In this light, the [IMF] mission encourages the authorities to proceed with
wide-ranging structural reforms, including further improving business climate, facilitating
financial intermediation, and pursuing land management reforms.

This is not the first time the Swaziland Government has misled the public about its
relationship to the IMF.

In 2013, the then Finance Minister Majozi Sithole was untruthful when he said the kingdoms
economy had recovered. He said at the time, I can safely say the economy is now under
control. We have survived the worst economic challenges ever.

But, the IMF had never said such a thing. Instead, in February 2013 it reported the Swaziland
economy, will be unsustainable over the medium term and subject to significant downside
risks. It said there needed to be upfront expenditure cuts, including on the wage bill.

The IMF said that in the recent past the government had repaid some of its debt but this was
partly achieved through cuts in education, health, and other poverty-alleviating spending.

54

To underline the fragile state of the economy, the IMF said, Swazilands economic prospects
remain difficult and that, without credible and comprehensive fiscal adjustment and structural
reforms, the current fiscal and external position will be unsustainable over the medium term
and subject to significant downside risks.

There are many similarities between the 2013 IMF report and the one published this month,
including poor economic prospects, underfunding of social care projects and the need to
reduce spending on public service spending.

The Swazi Government has a long history of being untruthful about the IMF and what it says
about Swaziland.

In 2011, the Prime Minister Barnabas Dlamini called a press conference to announce that the
IMF was about to issue a letter of comfort that would express its confidence in the Swazi
economy and allow the Government to seek loans from international organisations such as
the Africa Development Bank. But, no letter existed and since that date, the IMF has never
given its support to Swazilands economic policies.

See also

IMF CONFIRMS ECONOMY IN TROUBLE
NOT MUCH COMFORT FROM IMF

.


55

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Richard Rooney was associate professor at the University of Swaziland 2005 2008, where
he was also the founding head of the Journalism and Mass Communication Department.

He has taught in universities in Africa, Europe and the Pacific. His academic research which
specialises in media and their relationships to democracy, governance and human rights has
appeared in books and journals across the world.

His writing regularly appears in newspapers, magazines and on websites. He was a full-time
journalist in his native United Kingdom for 10 years, before becoming an academic.

He has published the blog Swazi Media Commentary since 2007 and also has other social
media sites that concentrate on human rights issues in Swaziland.

He holds a Ph.D in Communication from the University of Westminster, London, UK.

He presently teaches at the University of Botswana, Gaborone.


56

Publications from Swazi Media Commentary available online free-of-charge

BOOKS

2013. The beginning of the End? 2012, a year in the struggle for democracy in
Swaziland

This compilation of newsletters from Africa Contact in collaboration with Swazi Media
Commentary contains an assortment of news, analysis and comment covering the campaign
for freedom in Swaziland throughout 2012. These include the Global Action for Democracy
held in September; campaigns for democracy spearheaded by trade unions and students and
the continuing struggle for rights for women, children, gays and minority groups.

2012. The End of the Beginning? 2011, a year in the struggle for freedom in Swaziland

This book looks at activities in the freedom movement in 2011. It starts with a section on the
unsuccessful April 12 Uprising followed by separate chapters looking at events in each
month of 2011, including the Global Week of Action held in September. They also highlight
the numerous violations of rights suffered by the poor, by children, by women and by sexual
minorities, among others, in the kingdom.

2011. Voices Unheard: Media Freedom and Censorship in Swaziland.

This volume of pages from Swazi Media Commentary focuses on media freedom and
censorship. It starts with some overview articles that set out the general terrain, moving on to
look at repressive media laws. Other sections of this book relate the daily threats journalists
in Swaziland face when they want to report, but are not allowed to.


57

OCCASIONAL PAPERS SERIES

No. 1. 2013. Cynicism Eats Away at Swaziland Journalism: The State of Swazi
Journalism, 2013

One thing that shines out about journalists and their editors in Swaziland is the deeply cynical
way they operate. Swazi journalists claim to be upholders of fine ethical traditions of honesty
and inquiry, but instead they are often publishing lies or playing with readers emotions to
boost company profits.

This article explores the state of newspaper journalism in Swaziland, a small kingdom in
Africa, ruled over by King Mswati III, sub-Saharan Africas last absolute monarch. Editors
are deliberately misleading their readers by publishing material that is intended to provoke
controversy and reaction, even though they know it also contains lies. This is done in order to
boost profits for owners.

No. 2. 2013. Swaziland Broadcasting Not For The People

A review of broadcasting in Swaziland that demonstrates through research that radio in the
kingdom only serves the interests of King Mswati III and his intimate supporters. All other
voices are excluded from the airwaves. The paper contrasts a public broadcasting service
with public service broadcasting and demonstrates that changes in the kingdoms
broadcasting cannot be made until it becomes a democratic state.

No. 3. 2013. Swaziland Media Need Code of Conduct for Covering Elections
A review of how media have covered past elections in Swaziland highlighting a number of
areas for improvement. The paper includes a suggested code of ethical conduct that Swazi
journalists can adopt in order to improve performance.
No.4. 2013. Swaziland Press Freedom: The case of Bekhi Makhubu and the Nation
magazine
In April 2013 Bheki Makhubu the editor of the Nation magazine and its publishers,
Swaziland Independent Publishers were convicted of scandalising the court after two
articles criticising the judiciary were published in 2009 and 2010. The purpose of this paper is
to bring together details of the story so far (May 2013). It is an attempt to bring under one
cover all the available information on the case in order to assist those people in the future
who might need a quick primer.
No.5. 2013. Media Coverage of Swaziland Election 2013.
A review of media coverage of the Swaziland national election, most notably in the only two
newspaper groups in the kingdom, and at international media. It notes that generally
newspapers in Swaziland ignored the real issue, that of the non-democratic nature of the
elections, and concentrated instead on trying to justify the governance system to their readers.


58

SWAZILAND: STRIVING FOR FREEDOM

PREVIOUS EDITIONS

Volume 13: Jan 2014 to March 2014, is available free of charge here

OTHER VOLUMES

Volume 1, Jan 2013, is available free of charge here.

Volume 2, Feb 2013, is available free of charge here.

Volume 3, March 2013, is available free of charge here.

Volume 4, April 2013, is available free of charge here.

Volume 5, May 2013, is available free of charge here.

Volume 6, June 2013, is available free of charge here.

Volume 7, July 2013, is available free of charge here.
Volume 8, August 2013, is available free of charge here.
Volume 9, September 2013, is available free of charge here
Volume 10, October 2013, is available free of charge here
Volume 11, November 2013, is available free of charge here
Volume 12, December 2013, is available free of charge here


59

Swazi Media Commentary

Containing information and commentary
about human rights in Swaziland

Click Here

Swaziland Striving For Freedom Vol 14 Apr - Jun 2014

Diunggah oleh

Informasi Dokumen

Judul Asli

Hak Cipta

Format Tersedia

Bagikan dokumen Ini

Bagikan atau Tanam Dokumen

Opsi Berbagi

Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Swaziland Striving For Freedom Vol 14 Apr - Jun 2014

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Swaziland:

Anda mungkin juga menyukai