Home | News | ANNUL 1973 DECREE TO SAVE SD, SAYS JAN

ANNUL 1973 DECREE TO SAVE SD, SAYS JAN

Font size: Decrease font Enlarge font


LOBAMBA – A government statement officially annulling the infamous 1973 Decree will save Swaziland’s standing with AGOA, MP Jan Sithole told Parliament.


Making his submissions during the Ministry of Commerce, Industry and Trade Portfolio Committee sitting in the House of Assembly on Friday, he said trying to salvage the country from the possibility of losing access to the African Growth Opportunity Act (AGOA) without doing this will be futile.


“It is all or nothing unless the conditions for renewal of the country’s eligibility for AGOA are met. If not, I sense that it could be a national disaster,” said Sithole.
AGOA provides trade preferences for quota and duty-free entry for specific African products into the United States market. The local textile industry has benefitted a lot from AGOA over the years.
However, the 1973 Decree in question, in essence as viewed by local civic societies, dissuaded political discussions, quietened dissent among the citizenry and put off some fundamental human rights, such as freedom of expression and association. 


Because of this legislation, the belief was that workers have over the years been put at a disadvantage.
Government on the other hand has maintained the decree was no longer applicable by virtue of the new Constitution (2005).
As it is now, government is left with less than two months to come with tangible and convincing evidence that workers’ rights were now respected in the country or else face deregistration from AGOA. The country’s apparel and textile industry employs about 19 000 people and about 10 000 could lose their jobs if the country is deregistered.


 Sithole mentioned that albeit a new Constitution was in place, just one sentence by government saying that the decree was no longer applicable would suffice.
“ The problem is that even though we have a Constitution, the country seems to be still bound by the old laws when closely looking at behaviour.
“There is the Public Order Act of 1963 which gives the police a right to disperse meetings by workers willy-nilly.
“This is incongruent to the Constitution which guarantees and protects the Freedom of Assembly. Current behaviour suggests the old laws are still in force,” explained the MP in an interview.
Meanwhile, Jabulile Mashwama, Minister of Natural Resources and Energy, standing in for Minister of Commerce, Industry and Trade, Gideon Dlamini, in Parliament, acknowledged Sithole’s submissions and said there was a need to correct the wrong perceptions held on the decree by engaging the relevant quarters. She said it was important for government to prioritise AGOA.


   

 

Comments (2 posted):

Bandzile Dlamini on 03/03/2014 08:39:06
avatar
The MP Jan is right in this case, the current constitution only exists on paper, practically NO! And, in this case the people's life should be prioritized, than a few men's will... AGOA is of much benefit to the people than a few individuals. This is a chance for 'MONARCHIAL DEMOVRACY' to prove the democracy part of it.
Mthunywa on 03/03/2014 10:31:01
avatar
Sir, please publish my letter because I think it will help the authorities in deciding on this 1973 Decree debacle. I must say that Jan is right to say this degree will have disastrous consequences for our economy. In fact it will become an obstacle to our first world vision. If the constitution is the supreme law of the land as everyone seems to agree, why then is it difficult for gov't to issue a one line statement saying "The 1973 decree is dead and buried as per our supreme law of the land which is the constitution." That one line should be enough to convince everyone and AGOA will be ours again. But we must first agree if the constitution is indeed the supreme law of the land 'in practice'. From where I'm standing the constitution exists only on paper and that's very sad for a country hallucinating about the first world. For example the so-called Terrorism Act was taken from apartheid SA and some politicians here want to hang on it as if their lives depended on it yet it defies the constitution. The constitution calls for a certain number of women in parliament but this constitutional requirement is being ignored with impunity. Was our good constitution a big mistake to others? Don't answer that!

Post your comment comment

Please enter the code you see in the image:

: EMPLOYMENT GRANT
Should government pay E1 500 unemployment grant?