Home | Feature | POLITICAL PARTIES MUST SEIZE THE MOMENT

POLITICAL PARTIES MUST SEIZE THE MOMENT

21/05/2018 08:20:00 By Vusi Sibisi

Font size:

Registration of voters that began last week signaled the beginning of the first phase of the general elections probably in September this year, but it is still not clear if political parties will join and contest the Tinkhundla political system’s ‘individual merit-based’ polls.

And talking about participating in the elections, it was disturbing to read that Chairman of the Elections and Boundaries Commission (EBC) Chief Gija, had warned that boycotting the elections would be disrespectful to His Majesty King Mswati III. He was apparently addressing the community of Engwenyameni Chiefdom, who are opposed to their incorporation to Lobamba Lomdzala Inkhundla. The area was formerly under LaMgabhi Inkhundla. Chief Gija was reportedly responding to a threat by the community to boycott the elections since they had not been consulted when the demarcation decision was implemented. As I see it, Chief Gija’s utterance was a veiled intimidation of the residents of the area. Factoring the Sovereign is meant to whip the residents into conformity ostensibly because he knows that people revere their King and would not want to be seen to be rebelling against him.

Yet such intimidation is contrary to the Constitution, the so-called supreme law of the land, whose Bill of Rights guarantees, among others, freedom of choice. And yes, voting is a choice of the individual and not that people are compelled to participate in the elections. In turn, Chief Gija’s apparent intimidation of the Engwenyameni voters gives credence to the narrative that the EBC is the face and mouthpiece of the Tinkhundla political system. Under the circumstances, the EBC can never deliver free and fair elections as previously repeatedly pointed out by various international observer missions to the local elections. And previously there have been serious allegations of how the EBC manipulated elections outcomes in favour of candidates favoured by the political status quo to which Chief Gija, as a traditional leader, is a footstool. On the participation of political parties, the one political party that is certain to participate is the Swaziland Democratic Party (SWADEPA), whose President Jan Sithole is the current Member of Parliament for the Manzini North Inkhundla.

He was elected during the last elections in 2013 after SWADEPA had resolved to contest albeit without divorcing from pursuing its core objective of a multiparty democratic dispensation. While other political formations have still not come out clear if they will participate, others like the People’s United Democratic Movement (PUDEMO), which enjoys the patronage of neighbouring South Africa’s ruling party, the African National Congress (ANC), have not changed their stance of boycotting the elections. This position is informed by that party’s narrative that by participating, they would be legitimising the Tinkhundla political system. PUDEMO and some radical peripheral political parties also want multiparty democracy, although there is no convergence on strategy(ies) or road-map towards achieving this since the obtaining political oligarchy is seemingly not interested in negotiating itself out of power. After all it is not in the nature of man to easily surrender or hand over power but it has to be wrestled from him.

Exacerbating PUDEMO’s position is that it, along with its youth wing SWAYOCO, was proscribed – technically all political parties are outlawed in the Kingdom of Eswatini – for allegedly being a terrorist organisation. However, in early February this year PUDEMO had appeared to be ready to participate when, alongside SWADEPA and the Ngwane National Liberatory Congress (NNLC), expressed a desire to engage in free political activity, including campaigning to sell their views to the electorate. As a prelude to participating, the parties wanted a mechanism enabling their recognition and registration as envisaged by Section 25 (4) of the Constitution. But the Attorney General’s position was that this was not necessary, and went on to explain that members of political parties were free to register and to be nominated for election based on the system’s ‘individual merit’. Recently SWADEPA and the NNLC sought clarity from the EBC on the roles they ought to play if and when their members chose to contest the elections.

Though it is not yet clear if the EBC responded to this, it appears the political parties were asking the impossible. For one, the EBC is an extension of the Tinkhundla political system and would do everything to protect its hegemony from political parties. Indeed the actions of the two political parties could be akin to asking the Tinkhundla political system to give way to multiparty democracy. That will not happen easily; power is not easily handed over or surrendered.
As I see it, political parties interested in using the Parliament route through participating in the elections to achieve political reforms, ought to come up with their own strategies and not look up to EBC to spell their roles. The EBC will jealously guard its own hegemony by protecting and insulating the Tinkhundla political system from any challenge and affront by political parties.

And the journey begins with the registration of voters for which the political parties must mobilise members and potential members. Of course this is fraught with many challenges because the State has not opened up the spaces for political parties to function properly, such as convening political rallies and debates. This therefore calls for shrewd and creative leadership to separate the wood from the trees anchored on the principle that there is no free lunch in politics. At this juncture, participating in elections with the view of influencing political reforms and transformation in Parliament seems a viable option than boycotting which over the years has failed to deliver political change while the kingdom continues to be ruined by the obtaining political system.