Home | News | APPROACH COURTS FOR ORDER AGAINST ’73 DECREE - WINNIE

APPROACH COURTS FOR ORDER AGAINST ’73 DECREE - WINNIE

Font size: Decrease font Enlarge font

MBABANE – Minister of Labour and Social Security Winnie Magagula has said anyone who felt aggrieved by the April 12, 1973 Decree can approach the courts for a declaration order.


Magagula, in her written responses to the portfolio committee, said her ministry, with the assistance of the office of the Attorney General,  tabled and provided additional information to the International Labour Organisation (ILO) to demonstrate the Constitution of the country as the supreme law.
“If any other law is inconsistent with the constitution that law shall, to the extent of its inconsistency, be void,” she said.
“Government is encouraging any party that feels aggrieved to approach the courts for a declaration order in this regard,” said Magagula.
She said the matter was discussed during the Social Dialogue meeting held on January 20, 2014 and parties could not agree on the status of the proclamation.


The minister said workers representatives stated that they had a legal opinion which indicated that it was still operational.
“They promised to share their opinion with government after consultation with their principals. The ministry will again review the opinion from the workers in consultation with the relevant ministries and suggest the best way forward,” she said.

 

Government has addressed AGOA concerns, says PM

MBABANE  – Government has addressed quite a number of concerns which were raised by the American government on issues involving the African Growth Development Act (AGOA).


This was said by Prime Minister (PM) Sibusiso Barnabas Dlamini, in his written responses which were tabled in the House of Assembly, on Wednesday.
The PM said his office acknowledged the importance of AGOA to the country and how critical it was to maintain membership thereof for the country’s development.


“In this regard government will do all within its power to safeguard the valuable benefits accruing there from,” said Dlamini.
The PM reiterated, however, that government was concerned about elements within the country that seem to undermine its efforts by conveying inaccurate information to the government of the United States of America.


“The laws of the country do not bar any person or association from enjoying legal rights including freedom of association and expression as entrenched in the Constitution of the Kingdom of Swaziland,” said Dlamini. He stated that all rights had responsibilities and must be regulated to ensure appropriate enjoyment of same.      

     
“However, the enjoyment of rights is often undertaken outside the confines of the law and relevant regulations,” said Dlamini.
He said following the breach of the laws and relevant regulations, the law would take its course.
The premier said this was often misconstrued and reported to the international community as a violation of freedom of association, expression and other human rights by the same Swazis who stood to benefit from AGOA.


“Subsequently such untoward conduct attracts negative consequences which are undeserved by the Swazi nation,” he said.
The PM said utmost cooperation of all sectors of society was essential.
He stated that any adverse action taken on AGOA by the American government would be the responsibility of those people and organisations who spread inaccurate information about Swaziland.


Meanwhile, Minister of Labour and Social Security Winnie Magagula, in her responses, said on January 27 to 29, 2014 the country was visited by the International Labour Organisation (ILO) High Level Technical Team who noted that a number of actions had been taken.

She said government was working closely with social partners to ensure that the issues raised by AGOA and ILO were fully addressed.
She stated that the amendments in the Industrial Relations Bill would also assist.


Comments (6 posted):

Mavala on 14/03/2014 07:12:24
avatar
Approach courts for the 1973 Decree? I think this is a bad idea because as Swazis bekunene we all know which Judges will be seized with this matter and the outcome is unlikely to please the principles of justice let alone the directives of our constitution. Going to court is a dead end, and apart from that the constitution is clear that the decree is dead. Even a child can see that. No need to go to court. Gov't must issue a statement saying the decree is dead. Next!
Ingrid on 14/03/2014 07:24:29
avatar
Government must be the ones to approach the courts unless they don't see that the decree is in breach of the constitution. We want to hear about gov't's position here first before the courts are approached. Besides, the courts in some other countries (not including Swaziland)are known to issue verdicts that defy legal reason. Ayaphekwa lama verdicts in those nameless countries! So I suggest no one should go to court over the 1973 decree.
Swazi on 14/03/2014 09:00:28
avatar
This is arrogance at its best.
mbho shongwe on 14/03/2014 13:11:23
avatar
The 1973 12th April Decree was a Constitution after the repeal of the 1968 6th September Independence Constitution. No repeal of that Decree as yet ! What if the Courts will agree that it exists ! What guarantee does the minister have that the Courts will agree that the Decree died on 2005 July 25th when the Current Constitution came into operation, but was never buried ! The current judiciary cannot pass the independence test and the minister is depending on this scenario ! Simply produce a repeal document and not misuse the vulnerable Courts ! Laws never die a natural death but are repealed !

Mbho
Sydney Maseko on 14/03/2014 17:13:24
avatar
1973 decree is active. Why? The decree was a Supreme Law and by extent a constitution of the country.It is absurd that a Supreme law (1973 decree) can be amended by implication as a result of an ensuing Act (Constitutional Act 001 of 2005) which contradicts the provisions of the initial Supreme law. In Short, by enacting a supreme law that contradicts a current Supreme law means, the subsequent law which is inconsistent with the decree, to the extent of its inconsistency is invalid.
There must first be a transitional clause in the 1973 decree which allows for the promulgation of the new law and the new law must make provisions that the decree has been repealed.
khanyisile ndlangamandla on 14/03/2014 18:09:15
avatar
But Prime minister which is the inaccurate information you are talking about when you say PEOPLE AND ORGANASATIONS ARE SPREDIND ABOUT SWAZILAND? Still in Swaziland the act stands the is no Democracy no freedom of speech no Human Rights in Swaziland ....
I wish you can be specific about what you are really referring to..

Post your comment comment

Please enter the code you see in the image:

: EMPLOYMENT GRANT
Should government pay E1 500 unemployment grant?