Swaziland Coalition of Concerned Civic Organisations on Kingdom of Swaziland Draft Constitution: briefing

Meeting report

FOREIGN AFFAIRS PORTFOLIO COMMITTEE
14 September 2005
SWAZILAND COALITION OF CONCERNED CIVIC ORGANISATIONS ON KINGDOM OF SWAZILAND DRAFT CONSTITUTION: BRIEFING

Acting Chairperson: Ms F Hajaig (ANC)

Documents handed out:
Swaziland Coalition of Concerned Civic Organisations: PowerPoint presentation
Swaziland Coalition of Concerned Civic Organisations: Report
Alternative Clauses to Swaziland Draft Constitution Bill: Federation of Swazi Employers Report (not presented)

SUMMARY
The Swaziland Coalition of Concerned Civic Organisations (SCCCO) briefed the Committee on the problems posed by the Swaziland Draft Constitution Bill, and the supreme power of the Swazi monarchy. The SCCCO discussed five thematic areas:
- the historical background to Constitutional development;
- the process and environment of Constitution-making;
- the content of the new Draft Constitution;
- socio-economic issues in Swaziland;
- the Constitution and international standards, and
- proposals on the way forward.

The Committee was concerned over the situation in Swaziland. It asked how the SCCCO expected South Africa to help assist Swaziland overcome its problems. It also enquired what relationship the SCCCO had with political parties in Swaziland and how the Tinkhundla system of governance related to the new Constitution. The Committee advised Swaziland to learn from other monarchies that successfully existed along with constitutional systems. It also wanted to be informed about the positive aspects of the new Constitution. Lastly, the Chairperson requested that the SCCCO make a submission to the Southern African Development Community (SADC) and the SADCF Parliamentary Forum (SADC-PF) so that the entire region could become involved in this issue.

MINUTES

Swaziland Coalition of Concerned Civic Organisations
Bishop Mabuza (SCCCO First Vice-President and Anglican Church Bishop) informed the Committee about the nature of SCCCO and its activities. Ms Lomcebo Dlamini (SCCCO Second Vice-Chairperson) and Mr Musa Hlophe (SCCCO Co-ordinator) then briefed the Committee on the constitutional historical background of Swaziland and the problems regarding the new Constitution.

The SCCCO was formed in January 2003 and its membership included a wide spectrum of civil society organisations that represented a diversity of views and interests. Its members had individually and collectively engaged the Swazi Government on the issues of governance and the need for dialogue with the public.

The number of key events could be seen in Swaziland’s constitutional history. One of the most important events was that the 1968, the independence constitution had been repealed. The Swazi Parliament had been disbanded by the King in 1973. This was because the NNLC opposition party won three seats, which threatened the King’s power.

The Constitution-making process had once again begun in 1996. A draft constitution had been submitted to the King in 1993. He had assented to this Constitution on 26 July 2005. However, the SCCCO were highly dissatisfied with this Constitution for a number of reasons. A number of provisions needed immediate attention as these allowed the King to indirectly hold the supreme executive, judicial and legislative powers of the Swazi government.

A Bill of Rights had also been introduced included in the Constitution. However, this Bill of Rights had no power. There were a number of contradictions and political, economic and social rights had been removed and made part of state policy, thus making them non-enforceable. Attempts to address the rights of women had not done much to change the position of women in Swaziland. Participation of citizens had also been undermined by the entrenchment of the Thikhundla system of governance that concentrated on "individual merit", thereby undermining the effect of political parties.

This severely flawed Constitution existed in a country faced with many socio-economic challenges. These challenges included high poverty levels, high HIV/AIDS infection levels, sluggish economic growth, high rates of unemployment and a lack of fiscal discipline. The SCCCO called on South Africa to assist them in facing these challenges.

Discussion
Mr M Sibande (ANC) referred to the report’s overview of the constitutional debate processes and the many problems. An example was the Swazi Parliament Ministers’ lack of capacity. He enquired about the relationships the SCCCO had with other political organisations in Swaziland. In 1998, the system of Tinkhundla had been introduced - what was the relationship between this system and the Constitution? Lastly, he asked what role the SCCCO wanted the South African government to play in solving problems. As they had not been mentioned in the briefing, what were the positive aspects of the Constitution?

Mr Music Masuku (SCCCO Committee) replied that the SCCCO was political in nature, but some of the Coalition’s members did belong to political parties. They did not advocate regime change, but a change in the political environment that all political parties could participate in democratic elections. The SCCCO would support any political party that won these democratic elections fairly.

The SCCCO had important working relationships with all the political parties. As the latter suffered from major factionalism, the Coalition trained them in leadership, conflict management and civic education. Many of the parties had been dismissive of the Constitution but had not contested it. The SCCCO also had a formal relationship with the National Constitutional Assembly. They could exchange notes with the political parties through this structure regularly.

Mr Hlophe (SCCCO Co-ordinator) added that the Swazi government and the Constitution aimed to create a democratic government through the Tinkhundla system. However, the definition of Tinkhundla and what it stood for was unclear. The only evidence of this system of governance was that forty Tinkhundla centres had been built in the forty constituencies. These centres were used during the election periods and were also meant to serve the communities as distribution points of identification documents and passports in the future. Many people have also accused the Tinkhundla system of being a feudal system and it was also not supported by democratic politicians.

Unfortunately the positive aspects of the Constitution were usually overshadowed by the many negative aspects. For example, the inclusion of a Bill of Rights seemed like a positive step but a number of transgressions in this Bill of Rights impeded its integrity. The advancement of women’s rights should also be celebrated but a number of provisions served as a limiting factor to this advancement. There were future plans to increase accountability by creating a register of politicians. However, this would first have to be created before it could be assessed. The Minister of Finance had estimated that the country was losing around R40 million a month to corruption. Hopefully the planned register would assist in reducing this corruption. A plethora of institutions had also been created and some had great worth. However, their functioning had also been impeded by the various personalities in charge of these institutions through Section 65 (4) of the Constitution. He hoped that these transgressions could be solved by challenging the Constitution through the courts and by relying on individuals within government to make changes. However, this would be limited by Section 245 of the Constitution.

Mr S Huang (ANC) remarked that it appeared that the Constitution gave all the political, social and economic rights to the King and not the Swazi people. He saw that 69% of the Swazi population lived in extreme poverty and 50% were unemployed. However, the King was intending to purchase a new jet worth R750 million. The King also enjoyed immunity for taxation in Section 11 of the Constitution. In the light of this spending, how could South Africa and the international community assist? Thirdly, there were large socio-economic challenges such as the prevalence of HIV/AIDS, which could forseably halve the Swazi population. Was it not more important to solve these socio-economic challenges before arguing over a Constitution? Lastly, how much of Swaziland did the King’s land occupy, as is could affect development?

Ms M Njobe (ANC) asked how the SCCCO hoped to change the political environment, and whether it had the support of ordinary people? Without this support, it would be difficult to achieve political change. She also enquired whether they had studied other monarchies to find out how to successfully combine a monarchy with a constitutional system. This had been achieved in many countries. Finally, she asked how the SCCO expected the South African Parliament to assist Swaziland.

The Chairperson requested that the SCCCO make a submission to SADC and the SADC Parliamentary Forum so that the entire region could investigate ways to assist Swaziland in the future.

Mr Masuku believed that South Africa able to do a great deal to help Swaziland. This was because of its political influence in the Southern African region and because of its human rights abuse history. A bilateral agreement between South Africa and Swaziland had been signed recently to mutually entrench democracy, human rights and constitutionalism. The SCCCO believed it had a framework that South Africa could use to assist Swaziland in a way that did not appear to be infringing on Swazi sovereignty. The problem was that the Swazi government had denied that there were problems in the country and this denial could lead to a situation of conflict and instability.

The SCCCO had received much support and solidarity from South African civil society. However, prominent people in key South African institutions had made announcements that had appeared to be the official position of these institutions and South Africa. For example, one of the Judges of the Constitutional Court had recently addressed a meeting of the Law Society and had stated the Swazi Constitution was the best in the world. It was vital that neighbouring countries tell the truth.

The Chairperson stated that South Africa fully recognised the problem in Swaziland and had sent a number of delegations to visit the country. However, transformation was also up to the Swazi people. She hoped that civil society organs would become strong enough to withstand pressure from the Swazi monarchy. It was extremely important that the SCCO take these issues to SADC and the SADC-PF.

The meeting was adjourned.