Print article   email story

LISTENING to people from Swaziland calling for assistance from both President Thabo Mbeki and the SADC, I find myself asking the cardinal question: What is it that the Zimbabwean people do or did which ensures them local as well as international attention which the Swazis cannot or have not done?

Unlike Zimbabwe, in Swaziland there is no such thing as democracy – no leaders chosen through democratic process, no labour rights, no consultative constitution. Since 1973 the constitution has been and remains a monarchical project.

The people have no right to organise and demonstrate their dissatisfaction with their leaders or otherwise. They are brutally suppressed by the military.

Leaders have no obligation to account to the masses as the masses have no right to remove them.

The country depends solely on donors, with most of the donor money spent on maintaining a monarch who has no interest in the wellbeing of the people. The majority live in dire poverty and the population is ravaged by Aids.

When King Mswati spends the donated millions on his many lavish parties as well as on cronies and too many wives, nothing is said.

In Zimbabwe, with all its difficulties, the people can vote for another leader. The people can demonstrate, the workers can organise, hence Mugabe, as opposed to King Mswati, remains the most demonised African leader.

Why does the international community say nothing about the lack of democracy in Swaziland?

Is it because, unlike Mugabe, King Mswati preserved and continues to preserve white privilege and interests in Swaziland? If this is not the case, then what is?

Shouldn’t the international community be calling for pressure on King Mswati so that he can introduce democratic processes in Swaziland – a country that remains the only one in the entire African continent where no political executive exists?

LUTHER LEBELO

Midrand

Subscribe to the print edition of City Press