Election Update 2003: Swaziland 2

ELECTION UPDATE 2003 SWAZILAND number 2 · 20 April 2004 contents Legal Perspective Legal & Institutional Architecture 1 Democratic Towards a Democratic Transition 10 Election Post-mortem Post-mortem of the Swaziland General Election 14 Traditional Politics Chiefdom Politics vs Electoral Process 23 Gender Perspective Interrogating the Gender Question 29 Published with the assistance of NORAD and OSISA LEGAL PERSPECTIVE The Legal and 2003. This political event SADC region that has not Institutional was preceded by the primary yet undergone a democratic elections held on 19-20 transition by way of Architecture September 2003. This article embracing multiparty for the reviews the legal and competition for state power Swaziland institutional architecture that (for further argumentation Election 2003 structured these two events see Claude Kabemba in this with a view to discovering volume). Even at the real Khabele Matlosa the broader framework for risk of repetition of the Electoral Institute of elections in Swaziland and views in this and the Southern Africa interrogating the possible previous Election Update meanings of that in terms of 2003: Swaziland, it is Introduction the prospects for democratic important to bear in mind transition in the Kingdom. It that in Swaziland the Swaziland organised its is worth stating from the following critical conditions Parliamentary elections over onset that Swaziland is one informed the 2003 electoral the period 18-19 October of a few countries in the process: election update 2003 · swaziland · number 2 • The country has not had SADC countries, but these issues speak to the a Constitution since 1973 rather as Orders for this legitimacy (or lack and just prior to the 2003 denotes the thereof) of the Chief elections public debate overwhelming authority Election Office in the both in and outside the and power of the King eyes of the electorate in Kingdom revolved, in whose executive powers playing its presumed role part, around whether or by far eclipse the as a fair umpire of the not to have a general watchdog role of election game and an election prior to a Parliament; thus the effective institution for Constitutional King’s deliberate leveling the political referendum; however, it political hegemony playing field. came to pass that the (more by design than by election would come first default) throttles the Thus three broad issues are and as such a Draft power of other organs of brought to light in this Constitution that exists the state and in so doing article, namely that lack of a has not as yet been put to thwarts accountability of functioning and living its litmus test through a the executive to the Constitution prohibits fair public enquiry regarding electorate and not to even political play during both its legitimacy and mention its deleterious elections in Swaziland and acceptability; thus, in a effects on checks and this is compounded by the nutshell, the election was balances in the fact that political parties still held under a condition of governance process; and remain banned. Second, the a Constitutional void, so • Again, unlike a majority election is governed by to speak; not only that; of SADC member-states, King’s Orders whose elections in Swaziland do Swaziland does not have primary thrust is not so much not give room for an independent electoral to entrench democratic political competition commission (IEC) and governance, but rather to between and among the election is run by a ensure and perpetuate the political parties, but one-person Chief authoritarian dynastic regime rather the elections are Election Office; the in the Kingdom. Thirdly, that contested by individuals Chief Election Officer even the institutional representing various and his deputy is framework for the constituencies styled appointed by the King management of elections in Tinkhundla; himself and of course Swaziland is far from being • Like the previous recent answerable to the King; an independent and impartial elections, the 2003 this situation raises a player given that it is election was governed by number of key questions strongly beholden to the state three pieces of legislation including the impartiality machine and under strong namely (a) the 1992 of the Chief Election influences of the King. Establishment of the Office as an adjunct of Parliament of Swaziland the state machine, Global and Regional Order; (b) the 1992 accountability of the Context of the 2003 Election Order; and (c) Office to both the Election in Swaziland the 1992 Voter contestants and the Registration Order; It is electorate as well as the Swaziland lives in its own instructive that all the transparency and fairness world despite the political three legal instruments of the Office as it winds of change that have are referred to not as executes its legal swept the SADC region Acts of Parliament, as is mandate of running and since the early 1990s. the case in a majority of managing elections. All Although both the reformed 2 election update 2003 · swaziland · number 2 Southern African sense depicted above in Only recently, the King Development Community order to suggest that in appointed a Commission to (SADC), through its Organ today’s globalising world work on a new Constitution on Politics, Defence and issues of democratic and a draft dated March Security (OPDS) does not governance and human 2003 does exist. The draft recognise any form of rights have increasingly has not yet been subjected to unconstitutional regimes, become international issues a national referendum to turn much the same way as do 53 that seem to transcend it into a national Constitution member African Union (AU) questions of sovereignty as yet and it is not yet clear and the 54 member even though state when the draft would be put Commonwealth club of state sovereignty, in and of itself, to a public scrutiny which is led by Britain, Swaziland cannot be wished away as its ultimate litmus test. It is still operates a fairly such. Thus, quite obviously worth noting that the Draft authoritarian political system the quest for democratic Constitution of the Kingdom anchored upon traditionalism transition in Swaziland of Swaziland (as it is called) and governments have been should, ipso facto, be rather than providing an formed in the Kingdom even cherished not only by opportunity for the opening in the absence of an concerned Swazi people, but of the political marketplace operating Constitution since also by the international for competition and a 1973. Interestingly, this community as organised in window for democratic debilitating political such formations as SADC, transition, attempts to environment has not become AU and the Commonwealth. entrench dynastic rule a major issue for debate and It is highly possible that behind the façade of clear-cut policy positions small geographic size, institutionalised liberal towards Swaziland in SADC, landlocked status and lack of democracy. Thus, despite the the AU and Commonwealth. a robust resource endowment attempt to institutionalise It is worth pointing out that makes Swaziland invisible to governance in Swaziland both Zimbabwe and Pakistan large multilateral inter-state through emphasis on the key have been suspended from organisations. In the next role of the critical arms of the Commonwealth for section, we review the legal the state such as the alleged human rights abuses and institutional environment legislature, the executive and and other vices emanating for the 2003 election in the judiciary, in the final from bad governance, yet Swaziland and pose a analysis the Draft Swaziland still remains off complex question whether or Constitution still centralises the hook. In fact, during the not this environment creates actual power within the recent Commonwealth an enabling condition for Office of the King and the summit in Abuja Nigeria in democratic transition. King’s Advisory Council. December 2003, following a decision taken by the Club to The Legal and Institutional Whereas the King wields extend Zimbabwe’s Framework for the enormous powers as an suspension, the latter simply Swaziland Election in executive monarch, the withdrew its membership Perspective King’s Advisory Council from the Club, an forms the hub of unprecedented move thereby Since the suspension of the government. The King’s throwing the Club into some Independence Constitution in Advisory Council is kind of disarray. 1973, Swaziland still does appointed for a period of five not have a Constitution and (5) years by the King himself The writer poses the legal is ruled by royal decrees.1 as Ngwenyama and is framework problem in chaired by the Senior Crown Swaziland in the broader Prince (Umntfwanenkhosi 1 Lodge et. al, 2001 3 election update 2003 · swaziland · number 2 Lomkhulu) also appointed by from the royal family and the 10. Minister for the King. The main mandate current Prime Minister Enterprises and of the Council is to advise following the October 2003 Employment: Hon. the King on “whatever issues election is Prince Themba Lutfo Dlamini or matters on which the King Dlamini (former Chairperson 11. Minister for Tourism, may seek advice” 2 This of Tibiyo Taka Ngwane a Environment and centralisation of dynastic royal investment corporation Communication: rule is entrenched behind a whose total net assets stood Hon. Mrs Thandi veneer of political opening in at E420 million in 1996). Shongwe; which the Draft Constitution The King appoints members 12. Minister for Public itself upholds a Bill of of Cabinet from both Works and Transport: Rights in Chapter IV. Chambers of Parliament Hon. Elijah Shongwe Further more, the Draft upon recommendation of the 13. Minister for Health Constitution seems to Prime Minister and the Draft and Social welfare: recognise the central role of Constitution proposes that Hon. Chief Sipho such key organs of state as half of the Cabinet be Shongwe the legislature, the executive constituted by members of 14. Minister for and the judiciary as well as the elected lower house.

Load more