Please read below ACTSA and Swaziland Human Rights Network UK’s (SHRNUK) letter to the Commonwealth Ministerial Action Group (CMAG).
Dear Foreign Ministers
We write to you as civil society organisations (CSOs) deeply concerned about Swaziland’s1 serious and persistent breaches of the Commonwealth Charter and international human rights law. We believe that the Commonwealth Ministerial Action Group (CMAG) should review Swaziland’s status. This position is based on consultations with a wide-range of CSOs in Swaziland.
In Swaziland, political parties are banned from taking part in elections. Moreover, the People’s United Democratic Movement, widely regarded as the country’s largest opposition party, is proscribed under anti-terrorism legislation. Political activists and human rights defenders are frequently harassed, intimidated and assaulted by the police and other state security agents. In the past year, state security agents have fired live ammunition at protesting workers and even at children.
King Mswati III is Africa’s last absolute monarch. Mswati III has huge influence over elections to the House of Assembly through his network of local chiefs, and the king directly appoints two-thirds of the Senate. Mswati III also appoints the prime minister and cabinet, as well as senior judges and civil servants. The king can veto legislation and criticising the monarch is against the law.
Swaziland’s political system has allowed Mswati III to amass a personal fortune estimated to be as much as US$200 million. This, along with the enormous annual royal budget (paid from public funds), enables members of the royal family to spend extravagant sums on luxuries. Meanwhile, according to the World Bank, 63% of Swazis live below the poverty line and, according to the United Nations, the country is one of the most unequal in the world. Public services throughout Swaziland are in disarray due to funding shortfalls.
Our collective assessment is that the Commonwealth’s engagement with Swaziland on democracy and human rights has been weak at best and counterproductive at worst. We have reached this conclusion for three reasons.
First, the Commonwealth supported the development of Swaziland’s current Constitution, which was adopted in 2005 and entered into force in 2006. Yet the Constitution does not comply with Swaziland’s obligations under international law, including the need for it to uphold the values and principles of the Commonwealth Charter. Second, the appointment in 2014 of former President of Malawi, Dr Bakili Muluzi, as the Commonwealth Secretary-General’s Special Envoy to Swaziland did not achieve any positive change. Third, since the role of Special Envoy to Swaziland was ended (over two years ago), the Commonwealth Secretariat does not appear to have developed any new initiative to promote democracy and human rights in Swaziland. Yet the situation in the country has not changed for the better; in some respects it has actually worsened.
In addition to the structural problems noted above, the final round of the 2018 national elections was marred by violence and accusations of bribery and vote-rigging. There is a serious lack of transparency when it comes to voter registration and voter turnout. The Elections and Boundaries Commission has not published the full results of the elections. The full results of the 2013 national elections have never been published. The African Union Election Observation Mission criticised the ban on political parties and the lack of adherence to the principle of separation of powers. The Commonwealth Observer Mission report in regard to the Swaziland’s 2013 national elections made the same criticisms.
The Government of Swaziland has made much of its amendments to the Suppression of Terrorism Act (STA) and the Public Order Act (POA). However, these amendments are deeply flawed from a human rights perspective. Under the STA amendment, the definition of terrorism remains very broad, and the process for proscribing organisations is largely unchanged. Under the POA amendment, organisers of public gatherings still face far-reaching restrictions, there are no mechanisms to hold law enforcement officials accountable for using excessive force against citizens, and it is illegal to criticise the king (or anything that is part of the country’s ‘cultural or traditional heritage’). It is important to note that many other Swazi laws, such as the Sedition and Subversive Activities (Amendment) Act, are also harmful to the realisation of human rights.
In our view, the Commonwealth has singularly failed to hold King Mswati III and his government to account. If CMAG does not subject Swaziland to a review, then it will in effect be saying that the Commonwealth Charter no longer matters.
Thank you for your time. We look forward to hearing from you.
Yours,
Michael Buraimoh
Director, Action for Southern Africa (ACTSA)
Sifiso Dlamini
Coordinator, Swaziland Human Rights Network UK (SHRNUK)