POLITICS-SWAZILAND: King Seeks to Set Course in Age of Democracy

By James Hall Reprint | | Print |

James Hall

MBABANE, Feb 22 2002 (IPS) - King Mswati III, 16th ruler of the House of Dlamini that has headed the tiny Southern African kingdom for over 400 years, delivered his shortest but some political observers say his most significant State of the Kingdom speech when he opened Parliament this week.

Sub-Saharan Africa’s last absolute monarch spoke from a royal podium set before two new gold thrones that had been installed for himself and the Queen Mother in the House of Assembly chamber of the Parliament complex at Lobamba, 15 kilometres east of Mbabane.

Long-time political observer Vusie Ginindza, editor of the Times of Swaziland’s Sunday edition, summed up the speech, “His Majesty offered no new initiatives because he did not dare, because government has utterly failed to carry out last year’s programmes. The king declared 2001 the ‘year of delivery,’ and was disappointed when this did not happen. He does not want to be disappointed again.”

Following the speech that was significant for what was not said rather than what was proposed, rumours of a cabinet shake-up were rife in the media. Tales of feuds and jockeying for power and influence amongst the 17-member cabinet of Prime Minister Sibusiso Dlamini commanded much newspaper coverage, though the reports depended on anonymous sources and seem little more than rumours themselves.

Although King Mswati is the country’s ruler – his father King Sobhuza abrogated the Independence Constitution in 1973, and endowed ultimate executive, legislative and judicial authority with the monarch – in reality the modern state of Swaziland is run by the same type of governmental bureaucracy as elsewhere.

Even a royal directive can be lost in a maze of anonymous lower- level functionaries, or be interpreted in such a way that the end result bears little resemblance to the original order.

As King Mswati attempts to set his country’s direction at a time of continuing pressure for democratic reform from progressive- minded Swazis and donor nations with human rights agendas, both traditional and governmental institutions are looking for ways to harmonise their administrative functions.

“No king can’t micromanage a modern country,” says former cabinet minister Musa Nkhambule.

In his memoirs published last week in the local press, long- time palace advisor A.K. Hlope recalled how King Mswati’s father, King Sobhuza, who reigned from 1921 to 1982, dreaded his death because of the governing chaos that would likely follow (and did).

In a Swazi-style lament of apris moi, le deluge, King Sobhuza noted to Hlope how his ministers were only interested in personal glory and enrichment, which they seemed to think was the purpose of obtaining a government leadership post, rather than engaging in nation building.

Currently, King Mswati is advised by a 24-member Swaziland National Council Standing Committee, largely composed of princes from the House of Dlamini, relatives of the royal family and like- minded conservatives.

Officially charged with the task of advising the king on traditional matters, the powerful committee is involved in every aspect of national life, from industrial legislation to the use of security forces.

Cabinet members, including the Prime Minister, are chosen by the palace, and serve at the pleasure of the royal family. Swaziland has a dual monarchy, headed by King Mswati on one hand, and Queen Mother Ntombi at her royal village Ludzidzini, site of the sacred Incwala kingship pageant and the Umhlanga Reed Dance ceremony, where thousands of Swazi maidens pay homage to the Queen Mother every September.

Outsiders rarely acknowledge the Queen Mother’s power in Swaziland affairs, but it is considerable. She scrutinises all cabinet post candidates prior to granting her approval.

Ginindza says, “Cabinet members learn they’ve been appointed without knowing how it happened. When they start work, they find out who sponsored them, and they are beholden to that person or group to keep their lucrative posts.”

The result can be governmental paralysis, which has caused King Mswati such consternation, as rival cliques compete for influence, using their cabinet protegees to push for programmes or block unwanted programmes.

“This governmental paralysis is an institutional problem,” says Jan Sithole, secretary general of the Swaziland Federation of Trade Unions. The federation is aligned with the Swaziland Democratic Alliance, which seeks to retain King Mswati as a constitutional monarch under a democratic system of government.

“The king is our symbol of cultural unity, but he is being compromised by involvement in politics. Government officials must be answerable not to secretive cabals but to the people. If they are elected, they will perform their work for the nation, because if they want to retain their jobs they must deliver,” says Sithole.

King Mswati may feel that desires for democratic reform were not included in a preliminary constitutional report delivered by his relative, Prince Mangaliso Dlamini, who announced that a permanent ban on opposition parties would be written into a new constitution. Speaking to parliament, the king announced that more input from Swazis would be sought as the constitution is drafted this year.

A foreign envoy on hand for the speech said, “King Mswati defines the meaning of ‘benevolent monarch,’ and you can see his frustration that important initiatives on poverty alleviation and AIDS, even the constitution, are not being carried out. Millions of dollars in grants and low-interest loan schemes intended to uplift the poor have been sitting idle for years because of an inert bureaucracy and a squabbling cabinet.”

Having ultimate executive authority also means the Swazi king may clean house whenever he chooses. He may feel he has to do so shortly if government officials are not proactive toward the problems of a kingdom where one third of the population may be HIV- positive, according to one UN study.

Government statistics show two-thirds of the people live below the poverty line, while unemployment in the formal economy stands at 45 percent.