IS SWAZILAND READY FOR CHANGE?

Khulumani

Comment


Elections under a constitutional order
Is Swaziland ready for change?

By Comfort Mabuza

The Swazi nation is yet again presented with an opportunity to go to the polls before the end of this year, the first elections under the constitutional dispensation.

Whilst most vote seekers have already gone all out to campaign and position themselves for the forthcoming elections, others have indicated that there was no use to bother themselves about the whole exercise because it was a farce.

Others have even gone a step further to dismiss the constitution as one that entrenches the status quo and that the multi-party democracy ideals in Swaziland will never be realized in our time. They argue that the constitution has failed to usher a new dispensation as it falls far too short of international benchmarks on democracy.

I have stated before and will do so now that I have no political ambitions whatsoever under the present system, but somehow I stand and advocate for human rights. I am sold out to the noble idea that citizens of any given country should be availed with an opportunity to elect people of their own choice to lead them.

They should also be allowed to organize themselves and come with their own manifestos for such a programme. I am also convinced that whatever system that is in place should ensure that free political activity is guaranteed without intimidation. Is this possible in Swaziland?

The mere fact that political formations remain banned in Swaziland and that free political activity is not ensured means we are operating in the dark, and this is a mockery of the 21st century democracy ideals.

Those who have advocated for change from within the system have come out clearly to say that it is impossible to change the system from within.

Therefore, one wonders how can Swazis advocate and demand a new order in Swaziland with the status quo using every security measure to silence the voices of the masses? It goes without saying that ours is indeed the proverbial animal farm, where change is almost impossible, because some animals are better than others.

Ideally, Swazis should be embracing change without fear as it is part of the history of humankind. If truth be told you cannot suppress dissenting voices forever.

Civil society is equally guilty of not becoming more proactive and involved while there is still time. There is this tendency among civic society organizations of waiting for too long and then only to awake during the election year to try and educate the masses about meaningful change, transformation and democracy.

One is certain that the Tinkhundla system of governance as it stands needs transformation, because it tends to enshrine and enforce the status quo.

Imiphakatsi (chiefdom kraals) are the domain of the traditional leadership and there is no way free political activity will ever be guaranteed in rural communities under these chiefdoms.

An ordinary Swazi will not be free to enjoy his/her political conviction under a system that has been drugged for over 35 years into thinking that political parties are a foreign entity meant to destroy national unity and the future of the Swazis. Change cannot come easy under such a regime.

It will take a generation to uproot such an ideology that has become a core belief of the Swazi nation.

Well-targeted civic education is needed to instil new and progressive thinking among Swazis. But this cannot be done overnight and surely it cannot be done by such a fragmented civil society like ours. Our civil society needs to employ new tactics if we are to see any meaningful transformation and change in Swaziland.

Free Political Activity

If any meaningful transformation and change is to be realized in Swaziland, it is time that political parties are allowed to operate freely. Nobody benefits from the status quo where free political activity is non-existent in Swaziland.

In fact, the image of the country is continuously destroyed by the continued banning of the political formations. If constitutionalism is embraced then why is government afraid of declaring all political formations free?

I dare say that the forthcoming elections should be held under the multi-party system. The government cannot pride itself in the fact that there are no political prisoners in Swaziland when still those organized formations are finding it difficult to operate and organize themselves freely.

King and Queen Mother

It is prudent to elevate the monarchy to be above party politics. In fact, the monarchy should be seen as a unifying symbol rather than be drawn into politics. It should be freed from those who at times abuse the very institution for their own selfish gains.

The King, who is regarded as the father of the nation, should play that unifying role and political ideologies should be left in the hands of the very politicians who can then become dirty and fight it out amongst themselves.

It is unfortunate that the constitution has given all the powers to the monarchy and that alone is interpreted to mean that the King has so much power and control that he can be equated to a dictator. This is an unfortunate scenario when the King can play a much more fitting role being that of being a national unifying symbol.

The King is not a politician and, therefore, he should leave the political games to politicians.

Separation of powers

For any free political activity to thrive in any given democratic context there should be separation of powers between the three arms of government.

When speaking of separation of powers, one is actually advocating that Parliament should enact laws, which is its primary duty. There is no reason for MPs to be involved in developmental issues as is currently the issue.

The executive under the Prime Minister should be tasked with ensuring that the governance machinery of the country is operational and delivering. The third arm of government, which is the judiciary, should be free from manipulation and be totally independent to administer justice for all.

Swaziland needs to ensure that the separation of powers is guaranteed. No one person should amass supreme control over the three arms of governance because such could be concluded to mean dictatorship reigns supreme in this country. It is time for change and our people should be set free.

Freedom of the Press

The media has been referred to as the forth estate and, therefore, should be enabled to operate without interference and manipulation. It should be professionally run and avail platforms and opportunities to all citizens without fear or favour.

If for any reason the media is seen promoting only one ideology and supporting the status quo without being critical then it is not truthful to its mandate.

Professional bodies like a Media Complaints Commission [MCC] or Press Ombudsmen should be put in place to ensure media accountability and professionalism and respect for human dignity. No media should be abused for selfish ambitions. People should be given information in order to make decisions. The media should be seen contributing to good governance and accountability. This is only possible in a democratic dispensation that respects democratic ideals.

I hope civil society is ready to give guidance and direction to this anticipated new order. Are the masses ready for change? If not, then it means we as civil society are speaking in different tongues.

Unless we are availed with a grand Marshall plan meant to bring about meaningful change, we are destined for yet another hopeless five-year cycle of parliament that will continue to be a rubber stamp and a judicial system that is under the control and manipulation of a chosen few and a government that is dancing to the music of the monarchy.

How long will our Swaziland continue to be run like an animal farm where some animals are more equal than others?

Comfort Mabuza is National Director of MISA – Swaziland.

First published in Khulumani, the newsletter of the Media Institute of Southern Africa, Swaziland chapter, issue 11 (January – March 2008).

LEARN VITAL POLLING LESSONS

Khulumani

Comment

Vital lessons to learn from Kenya, Zim experiences

By Lomcebo Dlamini

In between the aftermath of the Kenyan elections and the holding of the much anticipated Zimbabwean harmonised elections, it is appropriate to consider what lessons these experiences and the governance issues they raise, may hold for Swaziland as we prepare -albeit belatedly - for the 2008 parliamentary elections.

A number of debates characterised political discourse in the country raising issues such as the following:

- the tinkhundla system of governance and its ability to deliver a truly
democratic dispensation;
- political power: its seemingly sole entrenchment in the office of the
- Monarchy and the implications of this on democracy;
- the illegality of political parties since 1973 and despite the provisions of
- the new Constitution as well as their ability and capacity to contest for
and effectively exercise political power within the current system;
- the varied positions of political formations and civil society groupings on
whether to advocate for participation or boycott of the 2008 elections;
- the role of the citizenry in participating freely in matters relating to their
self-determination and governance;
- the role of the legislature and the capacity of legislators to perform the
expected duties and responsibilities; and
- the relative political illiteracy of the populace and the need for civic
education

The national Constitution has raised the level of discussion of these matters due to some of its provisions which introduce some changes the situation that was governed by the 1973 King's Proclamation to the nation, whose provisions and enforcement are largely held responsible for diminishing civil liberties and creating a fear of political activism amongst the populace.

Amongst the significant changes introduced by the Constitution are the recognition of the freedoms of association, assembly and expression, the establishment of an Elections and Boundaries Commission; and the minimum quota of 30% women in Parliament and the procedures aimed at achieving this number.

Despite the commencement of the operation of the Constitution in 2006, to date, there has been no meaningful implementation of its provisions; those relating to the elections are no exception, despite the urgency of the situation.

The main question therefore is with respect to our preparedness to hold elections. In this regard, if one looks at the general expectation that parliamentary elections are usually held in October, and that according Section 134 (2) Subject to the provisions of subsections (3) and (7) Parliament, unless sooner dissolved shall stand dissolved five years less two months from the date of first meeting of the House following a general election...'the delay in the appointment of the Elections and Boundaries Commission will be to the detriment of the elections process. In addition, the legislation governing elections - namely, the 1992 Elections Order, Voter Registration Order and Establishment of Parliament Order - precedes the Constitution and therefore does not incorporate the changes introduced by the Constitution.

Further, it is important to appreciate that the conduct of elections is a complex process, involving intricate and extensive planning.

For instance, processes such as confirmation of inkhundla constituency boundaries, voter registration, the preparation of the voters' roll, the training and deployment of electoral officials to undertake the various activities required such as the nominations and voting for the primary (at chiefdom level) and secondary (at inkhundla level) elections at the various polling stations, and preparation of ballot papers are lengthy and require close attention in order to attain as much accuracy as possible and limit post-election conflict. Yet, none of these processes - including civic and voter education - has begun.

In fact, the nation presently knows nothing about the conduct of this year's election. There are speculations, but nothing official - except the appointment of the Elections and Boundaries Commission which itself has been a source of controversy - that has been released to the populace regarding this critical national issue. It will be difficult for the citizenry to engage with the process if it continues to be shrouded in silence.

Another of the main concerns that often accompany elections is that regarding whether an election was ‘free and fair’ - the meaning of which has been considerably debated.

However, regardless of how it is interpreted, it is important to realise that the notion of ‘free and fair’ should not be invoked only to pronounce on the atmosphere or political climate on the actual election day(s) but must be interrogated in a holistic manner, taking cognisance of all that leads up to those days in which Swazis cast their votes.

There has been various commentary on how the "free and fair" question cannot be applied to Swaziland because of the nature of the tinkhundla system of governance where, due to the individuality of the candidates, their allegiance to the King and the absence of mechanisms to ensure accountability, there really is no possibility of introducing changes to government, because while it may be new faces, government (and its policies and lack of power) remains the same creature.

Nonetheless, the reality is that it is the system that obtains and will govern the elections and therefore must be subjected to these questions of ‘freeness’ and ‘fairness’.

It is submitted that Swaziland's political history - characterized by the repercussions of the assumption of supreme political power by the former King Sobhuza II and inherited by King Mswati III which saw political upheaval, and the suppression of political dissent - cannot be ignored because its legacy has created a populace that seems apathetic to political engagement, an apathy that has been nourished by the experience of harsh recrimination of those who challenged the system and their labeling as ‘unSwazi’.

In a society such as ours, particularly if there is sincerity in the assertion that we are now in a new democratic dispensation, it is critical that there be extensive civic education - not just for purposes of the election, but also for purposes of empowering the citizenry on the meaning of being a citizen and the importance of citizen participation as part of governance if the ‘damage’ inflicted on the political awareness of the population over the past 34 years is to be undone and the expected "freeness and fairness" is to be attained.

Apart from the national obligations in accordance with the Constitution, Swaziland is also party to the SADC Declaration on the Principles and Guidelines Governing Democratic Election. According to the declaration, 'SADC Member States shall adhere to the following principles in the conduct of democratic elections:
i. Full participation of the citizens in the political process;
ii. Freedom of association;
iii. Political tolerance;
iv. Regular intervals for elections as provided for by the respective National Constitutions;
v. Equal opportunity for all political parties to access the state media;
vi. Equal opportunity to exercise the right to vote and be voted for;
vii. Independence of the Judiciary and impartiality of the electoral institutions; and
viii. Voter education.
ix. Acceptance and respect of the election results by political parties proclaimed to have been free and fair by the competent National Electoral Authorities in accordance with the law of the land.
x. Challenge of the election results as provided for in the law of the land.

Juxtaposing the above principles with the preceding discussion on the existing situation, it is submitted that Swaziland is already in violation of some of the principles and in danger of violating others if the situation is not adequately corrected.

For MISA, as an advocacy organization that aims to contribute to the greater exercise of democracy through promotion of the freedom of expression, in particular through the media, it is important to note that the media is critical in the electoral process.

It will be through the media - both print and electronic - that the large majority of citizens will obtain information about the elections - the preceding processes such as voter registration and the dates for the election.

It will be through media coverage that potential voters will know about the candidates contesting the elections. It will be again through the media that issues related to the elections are discussed, and clarified.

It will, therefore, be important that the media also be adequately prepared and capacitated to closely monitor the electoral process and give qualitative analyses on it. It is common cause that the media itself faces constraints and impediments in conducting its work under the current conditions where there remain a variety of restrictions - legal as well as socio-cultural - on its ability to do its work effectively.

Nonetheless, this period should provide an opportunity for the media to also expand its horizons in ensuring access to information and being a platform for discussion of issues of national importance. It is hence critical that media takes advantage of opportunities or capacity building in this area and also learns from the media coverage of the various electoral processes that have occurred in the region as well internationally.

As we consider the challenges confronting the country, it is also important to note the opportunities to change this situation where, and if they exist.

The reality is that these elections are being conducted in a climate where there is an absence of consensus as to the political system and the appropriate political direction of the country.

The question therefore arises as to how best to contribute towards change within this context: should one participate in the hope for incremental changes to the system or should one refrain and seek other alternatives?

The holding of the elections is inevitable and hence this is a question that each Swazi will have to ask herself or himself and regardless of the choice that is made, it will influence the political evolution of the country.

Lomcebo Dlamini is Chairperson – MISA Swaziland

First published in Khulumani, the newsletter of the Media Institute of Southern Africa, Swaziland chapter, issue 11 (January – March 2008).

SWAZI MEDIA BARRED

Times of Swaziland, 21 May 2008

Click image to enlarge

SWAZI ELECTION – MEDIA ETHICS

From Swazi Media Commentary http://www.swazimedia.blogspot.com/

Media houses in Swaziland need to start preparing for the national election that is due to take place later this year (2008).

At the last election in 2003 Swazi media were criticised for not giving enough information to the people of the kingdom about what was going on.

On the day of the election itself Radio Swaziland didn’t even report that an election was taking place.

The poor media coverage prompted the Commonwealth Expert Team, which monitored the election in Swaziland, to recommend that in future elections a Code of Conduct for media personnel covering elections should be drawn up. This, it felt, would ‘ensure high standard and balanced coverage’ in reporting.

But nothing much has happened since then. The Swaziland National Association of Journalists (SNAJ) has a code of conduct that provides a framework of reference to all practicing journalists in Swaziland, both full-time and freelance.

The code is meant to ensure that members adhere to the highest ethical standards, professional competence and good behaviour in carrying out their duties. Its overriding concern is that members of the media should conduct themselves with a high sense of responsibility without infringing the rights of individuals and society in general.

However, the SNAJ code is not followed by most journalists in Swaziland and it does not deal with the coverage of elections. In this respect Swaziland is falling behind other countries in Africa. Since the turn of the century a number of African states have produced guidelines for journalists and other media personnel when covering elections. Among these states are Sierra Leone and Somaliland.

Here is an attempt to start people thinking about what a code of conduct on election coverage could look like in Swaziland, I want to propose a draft code of conduct for covering elections in Swaziland.

I do not want to reinvent the wheel so I have borrowed extensively from codes of Sierra Leone,
Somaliland and also work done by ACE Electoral Knowledge Network.


Preamble

The preamble should make some definitive statements about what the role media have in the process of politics, such as these.

The media play an important role in monitoring the electoral process. By covering the election events and the political campaign, the media ensure that the public is aware of what is happening.

The media help the public to make a free and informed choice. They do this in three ways in particular:
• By communicating political messages from parties and candidates;
• By relaying important voter information from election administrators;
• By subjecting the whole election process to independent scrutiny and comment.

Individual journalists

Then we might look at the responsibilities of individual journalists.
Such as:
• The first duty of a journalist is to report accurately and without bias.
• A journalist shall report only in accordance with facts of which s/he knows the origin. A journalist shall not suppress essential information.
• A journalist shall observe professional secrecy regarding the source of information obtained in confidence.
• A journalist shall report in a balanced manner. If a candidate makes an allegation against another candidate, the journalist should seek comment from both sides wherever possible.
• A journalist shall do the utmost to correct any published information that is found to be harmfully inaccurate.
• As far as possible, a journalist shall report the views of candidates and political parties directly and in their own words, rather than as they are described by others.
• A journalist shall avoid using language or expressing sentiments that may further discrimination or violence on any grounds, including race, sex, sexual orientation, language, religion, political or other opinions, and national or social origins.
• When reporting the opinions of those who do advocate discrimination or violence, a journalist shall do the utmost to put such views in a clear context and to report the opinions of those against whom such sentiments are directed.
• A journalist shall not accept any inducement from a politician or candidate.
• A journalist shall not make any promise to a politician about the content of a news report.
• A journalist shall take care in reporting the findings of opinion polls. Any report should wherever possible include the following information:
• who commissioned and carried out the poll and when
• how many people were interviewed, where and how were they interviewed and what is the margin of error
• what was the exact wording of the questions.
• A journalist shall regard the following as grave professional offences:
• plagiarism
• malicious misrepresentation
• calumny, slander, libel or unfounded accusations
• acceptance of a bribe in any form in consideration of either publication or suppression.

Media houses

Media houses have a vital role in ensuring fairness in the dissemination of information. The people have the right to know what all the candidates are standing for and not just those that the media house owners might support.
• In all media, there shall be a clear separation between fact and comment. News reporting should reflect the facts as honestly perceived by journalists. Comment may reflect the editorial line of the publication.
• Publicly owned media shall not express an editorial opinion in favour of or against any candidate.
• Publicly owned media have a duty to be balanced and impartial in their election reporting and not to discriminate against any candidate in granting access to air time.
• If media houses accept paid political advertising, they shall do so on a non-discriminatory basis and at equal rates for all candidates.
• News, interviews, information or current affairs programmes or articles in the public media shall not be biased in favour of or against any candidate.
• The media shall provide equitable and regular coverage to all candidates.
• The media shall encourage and provide access to the voters to express their opinion and views.
• The media shall promote democratic values such as the rule of good law, accountability and good governance.
• Any candidate or party that makes a reasonable claim of having been defamed or otherwise injured by a broadcast or publication shall either be granted the opportunity to reply or be entitled to a correction or retraction by the broadcaster or publisher or by the person who made the allegedly defamatory statement. The reply or correction shall be broadcast or published as soon as possible.
• News coverage of press conferences and public statements concerning matters of political controversy (as opposed to functions of state) called or made by the head of government, government ministers, or members of parliament shall be subject to a right of reply or equal time rules. This obligation acquires even greater force when the person making the statement is also standing for office.
• Publicly owned media shall publish or broadcast voter education material.
• Voter education material shall be accurate and impartial and must effectively inform voters about the voting process, including how, when and where to vote, to register to vote and to verify proper registration; the secrecy of the ballot (and thus safety from retaliation); the importance of voting; the functions of the offices that are under contention; and similar matters.
• Voter education shall include programmes in minority languages and programmes targeted for groups that traditionally may have been excluded from the political process, such as women and people with disabilities.
• Media houses should monitor their own output to make sure that it conforms with the standards set out in this code of conduct.

Candidates

Codes of conduct in election coverage in other African states recognise that political parties contest elections. In Swaziland, which is not a democracy, political parties are banned. The kingdom has its own unique form of ‘democracy’ which only allows candidates to stand for election as individuals.

The purpose of my draft code of conduct for Swaziland is to deal with the elections that will take place in 2008. It is highly unlikely that there will be a change of heart among the kingdom’s ruling elite before the elections are held, so we must assume that candidates will not be aligned to any political party. Therefore, this code of conduct is addressed to individuals; although it would apply equally to political parties should they be allowed to exist.


• All candidates shall respect the freedom of the media.
• Candidates shall not harass or obstruct journalists who are engaged in their professional activities.
• Incumbent candidates shall not abuse their office to gain unfair advantage in access to the media. This provision applies to all media, but is of particular relevance when publicly funded media are under direct control by the government of the day.
• Candidates shall not offer bribes or inducements to journalists or media houses to encourage them to attend campaign events or to report favourably on the party or unfavourably on other parties or candidates.
• Candidates should not misrepresent the stated positions or any other factual information about other parties and candidates.
• Candidates should avoid using language that is inflammatory or defamatory, or that threatens or incites violence against any other person or group.


Link http://swazimedia.blogspot.com/2008/03/swazi-election-code-of-conduct.html

First publsihed 28 March 2008