British public school-educated “playboy king” Mswati III of Swaziland, Africa’s last absolute monarch, attends his million-dollar birthday celebrations. Photograph: Gianluigi Guerica/AFP/Getty Images
It has the last absolute monarch in the world and the highest HIV-infection rate. Swaziland is crying out for change, reports Chris McGreal
Africa’s other Zimbabwe
By Chris McGreal in Mbabane
Mario Masuko is a man who looks with envy at Zimbabwe. The former Barclays bank manager-turned-political leader lost his job for daring to suggest that the world’s last absolute monarch, the British public school-educated “playboy king” Mswati III of Swaziland should allow his subjects to choose their government.
Since then, Masuko has been locked up for sedition and treason. His followers have been beaten and persecuted. And when Swazis elected a new parliament earlier this month, his People’s United Democratic Movement (Pudemo), like all other political parties, was effectively banned from competing because the selection of candidates is closely controlled by the monarchy under the guise of preserving the country’s culture.
“The situation in Zimbabwe is better, in that political parties are allowed,” Masuko said. “The only challenge there is one despot – that people go to elections and then the despot annuls them. People in Swaziland can’t even elect who they want. Instead we’ve got a king who treats this country and its people as his plaything. It’s feudal.”
The parallels between the two African tyrannies may be far from absolute, but the struggle for freedom in both countries is increasingly linked. South Africa’s powerful trades union confederation, Cosatu, has described the two countries as “twins who are reversing our collective gains as a region by promoting undemocratic and oppressive practices against their own people”.
It has announced plans to blockade the landlocked kingdom of about 1 million people as the first step in a rolling plan to increase pressure on Mswati to allow democratic government.
Clearly, however, the king is disturbed at being compared to Zimbabwe’s despotic leader: after the head of Swaziland’s trades union confederation, Jan Sithole, returned home from a Cosatu conference in South Africa last month to debate the parallels, he was interrogated by senior police officers. “They were absolutely obsessed with this link people were making between Mugabe and Mswati,” he said.
Masuko said Mswati, who came to the throne in 1986, has doubly failed because he has not only resisted reform but also abused his power.
“Monarchs are extravagant. They tend to be dictatorial. This one in Swaziland is more than both of those things because it is an absolute monarchy,” he said.
Swaziland has the highest HIV-infection rate in the world, a life expectancy of less than 35 years and extensive rural poverty. Nearly half the population is unemployed, and those with skills, such as nurses and teachers, often leave the country in search of work.
Yet the king spent the equivalent of half the national health budget to dispatch his 13 wives on a collective shopping trip to Dubai and Europe last month. The jaunt prompted Swazi protesters to coin the refrain: “We are dying while they are flying.”
The government spent millions more on a lavish joint celebration this month to mark 40 years of Swaziland’s independence from Britain and the king’s 40th birthday. That helped bring out thousands of people in the largest anti-government protest for years. The government hesitated to crush it, however, because it coincided with an influx of foreign dignitaries – Mugabe among them – for the celebrations.
Swazis did get to vote earlier this month, but they elect only a parliament, not a government. That is appointed by the king, whose choice of prime minister always happens to be someone from his extended family, the Dlaminis.
While political parties are not specifically banned, the constitution says elections are based on the traditional system, called tinkhundla.
On the surface, tinkhundla is an exercise in local democracy; in practice, it is a reflection of the much broader grip of the monarchy and traditional chiefs – officially described as the footstalls of the king – over the everyday lives of people.
Candidates for election to parliament have to be approved by local chiefs, who use their powers to quash dissent. And the only issues permitted to be raised in campaigns are local ones, forestalling any debate about the competence of the government.
“Everybody belongs to a chief in a village,” said Sithole. “If you don’t allow your children to go to the highly politicised cultural activities held by your chief, you are risking a lot: risking eviction from your home [and] your children not getting a scholarship for tertiary education, even if they get straight A grades. The father of the children may lose his job. It’s hard to resist that pressure.
“It’s the same with the elections. They are so controlled by the chiefs, from the selection of candidates to the issues that can be discussed, that they are in no sense democratic.”
Related
Who Is the World’s Worst Dictator?
Mswati III was 18 years old when he was crowned king of the Southern African nation of Swaziland. According to the constitution, he has the right to overrule all laws and rules, and it is illegal to investigate any matter relating to the him.
2 responses so far ↓
Swazi Media // October 1, 2008 at 12:31 pm
Here’s what democracy really means in Swaziland. At present we are waiting for King Mswati III to select who will be the Prime Minister and who will sit in the House of Senate.
The election for MPs that took place in September is being discredited (even within Swaziland) because of evidence of bribery and other malpractice among winning candidates.
Meanwhile, political parties remain banned and the parliament has very little power. The King makes all the important decisions.
For more on human rights in Swaziland visit my blog at http://www.swazimedia.blogspot.com
wil // October 3, 2008 at 12:51 am
Bling! Well for him anyway.