COUNTRY’S LEGAL NAME IS SWAZILAND - PPA LEADERS

MBABANE - The leaders of the Political Party Assembly (PPA) who are under investigation say legally, the country’s name is Swaziland.

Sibongile Mazibuko, Musa Nkambule, Jan Sithole and Wandile Dludlu, who are represented by Thulani Maseko in the matter in which they seek the setting aside of the search and seizure warrants against them, said the legal notice establishing the country’s name as Eswatini was not in line with the Constitution.

Mazibuko is the President of the Ngwane National Liberatory Congress (NNLC) while Nkambule is the Chairman of Sibahle Sinje National Movement.
Dludlu is the Secretary General of the People’s United Democratic Movement (PUDEMO) and Sithole is the President of the Swaziland Democratic Party (SWADEPA).

Raised

They made the submission yesterday before Judge Nkosinathi Maseko when the court heard points of law that were raised by the State in the matter.
Assistant Attorney General Mbuso Simelane had stated that the PPA leaders had referred to the court as the High Court of Swaziland in their papers instead of the High Court of Eswatini. Simelane said the court referred to by the quartet was non- existent.

In response, their attorney informed the court that when Legal Notice 80 of 2018 was issued, it was stated that reference to Swaziland may be construed to mean Eswatini.

Thulani said the legal notice was merely a subsidiary in the scheme of things. The human rights lawyer further mentioned that the manner in which the legal notice was issued was allegedly not in line with the Constitution, which rendered it illegal.

The High Court, according to Thulani, was not established by a legal notice but by the High Court Act of 1954, which is an Act of Parliament that was never repealed or amended.

“What is the legal notice standing vis-a-vis the High Court Act? Which is superior? I understand that the High Court Act remains superior and the legal notice issued by the king does not supersede the Act of Parliament,” he said.

Illegal

According to Thulani, the King was allegedly misled into endorsing it.
“The legal notice is absolutely illegal and absolutely unconstitutional. The legal position is that the country remains Swaziland and this court remains the High Court of Swaziland. If there were to be any changes, they would have to be in line with the Constitution.”

He went on to say the practice directive that was issued by the chief justice after the country’s name was changed to Eswatini to the effect that the new name now be used on court papers, was allegedly unlawful.

He said the chief justice’s directive did not create a new court at all. He pointed out that the power to do so remained with those who created the supreme law. There is a pending matter in court challenging the constitutionality of the change of the country’s name to Eswatini.

Directive

Simelane, in reply, told the court that Legal Notice 80 of 2018 was law and the chief justice’s directive existed.
Thulani  noted that the affidavit filed by the police referred to the deponent of the State’s papers as a member of the Royal Swaziland Police instead of Royal Eswatini Police Service.

If Simelane’s submissions were anything to go by, Thulani told the court that there was then no application before the magistrates’ courts for search warrants. The human rights lawyer also said the heads of argument filed by Principal Crown Counsel Bheki Tsabedze referred to the court as the High Court of Swaziland.
The respondents, according to Thulani, were inconsistent in their use of Eswatini in their papers unlike the applicants who constantly referred to the court as the High Court of Swaziland.
The assistant AG informed the court that the PPA leaders were not properly before court. He said they should have filed their applications at the magistrates court, which issued the search warrants. He said they could only come to the High Court for a review of the magistrate’s decision.
Warrant
Thulani submitted that an application to set aside a warrant of arrest can be made at the High Court. He told the court that the PPA leaders were properly before court and that there was nothing preventing them from approaching the High Court. Thulani said it was not for government to tell them how they were to come to court.
Meanwhile, Simelane said the PPA leaders cited the prime minister in their papers to merely embarrass him. However, Thulani, who represents the quartet, argued that they cited the prime minister in his capacity as the line minister of the police. Simelane further said Sithole was the only one who applied to set aside the search warrants, which Thulani denied.
The court has reserved its judgment and extended the interim order preventing the police from doing anything concerning the applicants while the matter is still pending in court.

Post your comment

Your name:

Your e-mail address:

Add your comments:

Please enter the code you see in the image:

Image:

Code: