King's actions harm democracy, unions

Swaziland's absolute monarch, King Mswati III has moved to quell any protests against a new constitution that will entrench his rule. Mswati has promulgated the Internal Security Bill 2002, which is likely to be passed by a parliament lacking any opposition parties and made up entirely of Mswati loyalists. The Bill seeks to make it illegal for people to wear any political colours, display flags, or participate in political rallies. It complements the 1973 decree that banned political parties in the kingdom. Swaziland's Federation of Trade Unions (SFTU) president Africa Magongo told IRIN on Thursday that the federation and its partners, civic organisations and political movements, were planning to hold mass protest action against the proposed new constitution. But with the promulgation of the new Internal Security Bill, Mswati had sought to snuff out any form of dissent in a country with a population barely reaching one million. Magongo said: "The bill itself is not, per se, an internal security bill, [it is not aimed at] any crime related issues within the country but more politically motivated. Particularly because we are about to begin a massive campaign against the constitutional process. We have already written to the king and the prime minister, making it very clear we want to start a mass action against these issues." However, he hoped mass action could be avoided through fruitful dialogue with the authorities. Mswati's constitutional review commission has released a report that will be the basis for a new national constitution, to be drafted by September. It calls for a permanent ban on opposition politics and an expansion of royal powers. Since 1973 the tiny country has been without a constitution. "The 1973 decree [by Mswati's father King Sobhuza] gives the king absolute power, it bans any public demonstrations, any political activity by any other organisation other than the ruling clique, it includes the 60 day detention and bans all political parties, it also provides for people to be charged with high treason in relation to political activity," said Magongo. However, the 60 day detention law was later repealed. He argued that the constitutional review process was "hijacked by the king and some of his cronies". "They refused any submissions by groups, they wanted only individual submissions on what should be enshrined in the constitution. They held submissions in camera, they refused to allow media coverage and they refused to remove the 1973 decree. Commissioners were hand-picked and appointed by the king. And a decree was passed that rendered them immune from any criticisms and any public scrutiny," said Magongo. The decree banning criticism of the commission was later repealed. He said the review commission's report had contended that Swazis did not want a bill of rights in the constitution. "They say there should be nothing relating to human rights, they say Swazis want the king to remain an absolute monarch, the whole process was tailor-made to preserve the status quo," Magongo said. Amnesty International has on numerous occasions raised concern regarding Swaziland and the suppression of political activity. But mostly, Swaziland's travails have been largely ignored by the international community, alleged Magongo. The latest Amnesty International report on Swaziland said that the "rights to freedom of association, peaceful assembly and expression remained restricted" and that "government actions threatened the independence of the judiciary and undermined court rulings". Amnesty said there had been reports "of torture and ill-treatment" and that government opponents "were subjected to arbitrary detention and politically motivated trial proceedings". The rights group said that violations of women's rights remained systematic.