SWEET COLLAPSE A POLITICAL HOT POTATO

A simple case of that ordinarily should have been pursued through the criminal justice system and subsequent prosecution of those fingered to have broken the law has, instead, become a political hot potato ostensibly because it involves labadzala hence even an attempt to debate it in Parliament has been abortive.

This is the matter of the Swaziland Women Economic Empowerment Trust (SWEET) and SWEET Micro Finance (SMF) both of which collapsed under a cloud along with millions of thousands of Emalangeni investments by ordinary women who dreamt of one day turning their dreary existence into one of economic and financial independence. In Eswatini political parlance labadzala is a diplomatic but unambiguous reference to royalty, specifically the King and Indlovukazi.

Collapse

That the matter appears to have found refuge in a highly flawed political system and, therefore, swept under the carpet under the cloak that it involves labadzala is owed to the fact that SWEET is, or was, under the patronage of Her Majesty the Indlovukazi, who is now apparently being used to protect those responsible for its apparent collapse. This is in spite of the fact that a joint investigation by regulators, the Central Bank of Eswatini (CBE) and the Financial Services Regulatory Authority (FSRA) have concluded that ‘the governing structure does not include the Queen Mother and her association with these entities (SWEET and SMF) was purely ceremonial’.

The CBE and FSRA were triggered into action by an online petition by investors, upon noticing that SWEET had ceased operations after its offices had shutdown, demanding to be refunded their monies and action taken against those responsible. But this is the Kingdom of Eswatini where the law has eyes and there is absolutely nothing normal. Hence instead of the SWEET matter being treated like all cases of suspected crime, that of fraud and theft, it has morphed into a political hot potato wherein even the Legislature is afraid to touch it. When the matter was brought to Parliament by Mkhiweni Member of Parliament (MP) Michael Masuku, at the instance of investors from his constituency, it appears that MPs were so apprehensive that they pushed it under the carpet ostensibly because it involves ‘labadzala’.  

Investors

Since SWEET went under, its investors have been left in the lurch, unable to recoup their investments or to get those responsible for scamming them to justice. As it turns out some of the personalities who were behind SWEET are living the high life. This is after all a case of suspected fraud and theft for which someone or some people are responsible and should be duly prosecuted. Yet no one, including Parliament, wants to pursue this matter for fear of the unknown simply because of the name of Indlovukazi being associated with the abortive project as its patron.

This therefore means the culprits are insulated from prosecution and unlikely to be punished. It also follows that the investors will also not find closure to the matter by being duly compensated. Why, because the majority of investors are simple village women who wanted and were promised a better life if they invested their hard earned money in what was to transform into a women’s bank.

What is mystifying is that while the CBE and FSRA have called for action to be taken, through appropriate avenues against those responsible for the demise of the schemes, the reports of their investigations remain classified ostensibly because they are being reviewed by the appropriate authorities and thus remain confidential. Therein lies the sting, why the reports have been kept secret when this is a matter of public concern if the intention is not to protect those responsible. And as for the appropriate authorities, this is a gimmick that is routinely used especially in political circles to numb the senses of the public until an issue gets cold and disappears from the public domain and dies a natural death. Case closed!

Sorting

As it turns out, according to reports by this newspaper, both the Minister of Finance Neal Rijkenberg and Speaker of the House of Assembly, Petros Mavimbela, were questioned about the matter and Minister Rijkenberg said the CBE was attending to that. This is typical political passing of the buck when it should stop with him. On the other hand, Speaker Mavimbela repeatedly claimed he was busy to attend to queries by this newspaper, including why the matter had not made it to the Order Paper for it to find its way to the floor for debate yet it had been included in the Notice Paper of October 2020. The Speaker has recently been accused, by his legislative peers, of having switched sides to motor the agenda of the Executive arm of government leading to a conflict of interest. 

As I see it, the SWEET controversy is a classic example and mirror of the institutional nature of corruption nurtured by the tinkhundla political system because it is not answerable to the people but only to the leadership. In this scheme of things no one thinks for and represents the interests of the ordinary women investors who have been left poorer with no recourse whatsoever because they are faceless and inconsequential. Such is the fate of the ordinary folk under the obtaining class-structured social order and polity. Frederic Bastiat’s observation is germane in respect to the systemic and progressive decline of values occasioned by the obtaining polity: “When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men (and women) in a society, over the course of time they create for themselves a legal system that authorises it and a moral code that glorifies it.”

Post your comment

Your name:

Your e-mail address:

Add your comments:

Please enter the code you see in the image:

Image:

Code: