Comment
The Nation
March 2007
Next year [2008] Swaziland will have its first elections under a constitution. Not since 1972 has this country held an election where people had some form of protection. We need to be careful who we elect to represent our various Tinkhundla in 2008. But then, there is no blueprint on what this Tinkhundla stand for, anyway. SIPHO NKOSI-DLAMINI reports.
Next year [2008] Swaziland will have its first elections under a constitution. Not since 1972 has this country held an election where people had some form of protection. We need to be careful who we elect to represent our various Tinkhundla in 2008. But then, there is no blueprint on what this Tinkhundla stand for, anyway. SIPHO NKOSI-DLAMINI reports.
What was the significant transformation history of the last century? I would say, for Africa, it was the liberation from colonialism. Unfortunately, it became mere substitution of a foreign oppressor by a home grown one in many of our African States.
The results were the coups that contributed to the pandemic state of poverty in the midst of plenty: good soil, human resources, rivers, forests, wild life, spectacular tourist attractions, preserved cultural identities, diverse natural resource development opportunities, etc.
Even though the imperialists had been removed from the Government, their control of the thinking and planning of development strategies remained ex patria through a clandestine assistance programme of "expert" advice from the colonial masters.
The masters helped educate the former subjects to think that expertise can only be obtained from the master and no indigenous persons can match even an inexperienced externally approved so-called expert.
Thus, we have become like mentally tethered chickens who cannot appreciate their freedom to own the copyright of their own problems and solutions.
One of the preachers in the electronic media has recently declared: "The whole world knows that Africa is a corrupt continent". This was an African pastor telling an unpalatable truth.
I was hoping someone would come up with a differing view. The silence has been deafening. So be it; self-criticism may help our strife towards 180degrees turn around. Let's continue praying!
Our Prime Minister is fighting a lone battle against corruption in Swaziland. He is alone because some of his cabinet colleagues are deeply involved and there are pending cases in court.
The mere implication of a high public officer resulting in an actual charge must be followed by a resignation, even before a trial, for bringing the office into disrepute.
In our country, one who is corrupt in most cases is protected and sometimes rewarded.
HMK assented to the Prevention of Corruption Bill. Accordingly, it became Act; but its effectiveness still relies on the election, by the responsible minister, of its effective date.
This is incomprehensible to the ordinary patriot. May we have some help here? The same law discourages retrospective prosecution. This means rewarding criminals for ill-gotten wealth. One is open to enlightenment again!
The multiple medical examinations the PM is undergoing may be due to the resultant stress of fighting the corruption battle alone. He has no reason to fight alone. The populace has long availed itself to fight the scourge; but the application of the fighting rules thrives on their ignorance of how effective their contribution can be.
The system may have its good attributes, except those visible to the advantaged, but the populace is disempowered to play a meaningful role. There are no means of establishing checks and balances to develop a culture of accountability with a motto of pro patria mori (to die for the fatherland).
Who must pilot the reduction of good governance?
The permanent government comprises the civil service. Unfortunately, it has become mostly uncivil and less serving. "I" has become the most important and "we" the least important thesaurus versions.
The exploitation of national resources for personal gain has become so rampant that it has become tempting even to the true civil servants. The Almon Mbingo's culture of upholding the General Orders and service integrity has died.
A new culture of 'what's in it for me?' has replaced patriotic service.
The old civil service was truly educated in the University of Life, albeit with a relatively brief encounter with the conventional classroom. Their good performance was motivated by the yearning desire to prove the former bosses wrong about their capability.
What is motivating the present civil service? Seemingly, it is money. The modern officers spend a large amount of time with witches instead of applying the knowledge they have acquired at the expense of the taxpayer.
The belief in these nocturnal consultations -as emboldened them to cheat the employer with impudence, even wish death to their hardworking colleagues. This is a disgrace to having been in any classroom/ lecture theatre.
Now that one has given a peephole view of the scenario, let's bring in 2008. This is the year of elections in Swaziland. We have a new constitution, allowing freedom of association and freedom to stand for elections.
Let anyone challenge the constitution as to the modalities of nomination, if need be.
What is motivating the present civil service? Seemingly, it is money. The modern officers spend a large amount of time with witches instead of applying the knowledge they have acquired at the expense of the taxpayer.
The belief in these nocturnal consultations -as emboldened them to cheat the employer with impudence, even wish death to their hardworking colleagues. This is a disgrace to having been in any classroom/ lecture theatre.
Now that one has given a peephole view of the scenario, let's bring in 2008. This is the year of elections in Swaziland. We have a new constitution, allowing freedom of association and freedom to stand for elections.
Let anyone challenge the constitution as to the modalities of nomination, if need be. The fact is that the constitution must be tested at the ballot box.
Hitherto, we have elected people who have gone to Parliament for themselves and not for us. They have demonstrated that through the clause deletions they made without consulting us. We saw them last during the previous elections and they have never come to us for consultations.
Whose mandate did they have to go to Parliament? To be honest, nobody's! Our choice of MP's was based on ignorance of the real issues. We elected persons on the basis of their birth, noisiness in the House, controversial sensationalism and a belief that they know our wishes.
We never told or instructed them of our expectations; they had no method of reporting to the electorate and they eventually became our bosses because of abdication of our responsibility as the electors.
The MPs have successfully thrived on the ignorance of the electorate about parliamentary issues. Who shall save us from this Animal Farm mentality?
Could any enlightened individuals please develop papers on what the vision, structural organisation, people participation, policy development, key policies (fiscal, education, health, agriculture, competition, liberalisation, security, general development, etc?) are of those who support the Tinkhundla and/or Multi-party 'democracy' dispensations. This will help us, the proletariat, to make informed decisions.
The system of democracy has been academically described in many countries with distinct differences such that it has become clear there is no application method cast in stone.
Democracy is merely a philosophy, attractive though it may seem, whose ideals are yet to be achieved. Even the so-called great democracies have used force to promote democracy. One thus wonders how the will of the people can be imposed from outside the community.
For the assistance of those who may have no idea of the origin of the thesaurus version democracy. It comes from Greek: demos = people + kratos = power. Democracy is therefore 'power to the people'. So, any one/group who promises democracy, must premise it on the power to the people i.e. the government belongs to the people; the people do not belong to the Government.
One must congratulate Sibahle Sinje for telling the populace that they have a strategy document for 2008, albeit now seemingly misty. This will be necessary for all Parliamentary aspirants to help the electorate to make informed decisions-on the type of candidate to vote for and indeed to formulate the mandate to give theii* representative.
Otherwise, many people will continue to regard registration and voting an exercise in futility.
The low turnout in recent elections is a sign of the level of disgruntlement. Unfortunately, this attitude enables leadership by the sandy blind.
The Chief Electoral Officer has come out in the media against any campaigning until the right time has been declared. Nonetheless, the electoral centres must be readied now so that the officials do not overstep their authority and the electorate is enabled to make decisions without surreptitious influences.
The electorate need understanding of the criteria and parameters they must employ in deciding on the candidates. We should not form a government that thrives on the ignorance of the people come 2008.
