THE PROBLEM WITH SWAZILAND

Sir,

A written constitution is not a prerequisite for democracy. Not surprisingly some flourishing democracies have no written constitution and some failed democracies had wonderfully crafted constitutions.

Swaziland has a written constitution. Lamentably it has not worked well. As far as what some people say, the problem with Swaziland is not constitutional but attitudinal. Our attitude towards the law is perverted. It is an attitude that scoffs at the rule of law and consequently exalts lawlessness.

The constitution is the supreme law of the land but is never used to its full potential. It is not surprising that the people breaking every law have also repeatedly trampled the stipulations of the constitution and periodically reduced the constitution to a worthless piece of paper. England for example has no written constitution but has a flourishing democracy.

Her politics are regulated by traditions and social conventions that evolved over many centuries. On the other hand Israel has failed to reach a consensus on the subject of Jewish nationhood and therefore lack a generally acceptable basis to a sound constitution. Israel is yet to have a written constitution.

On the other hand Swaziland with her series of supposedly magnificently written constitution has continually failed to hold credible elections and uphold other tenets and ideals of democracy. Her institutional anchors of democracy remain very weak and government is estranged from the people. The present Swazi constitution is not a perfect document. It does not serve the people.

Colleen Matsebula

Post your comment

Your name:

Your e-mail address:

Add your comments:

Please enter the code you see in the image:

Image:

Code: