Let's ponder on this

His Majesty King Mswati III ought rightly to be applauded for exercising magnanimity in pardoning and revoking the 18-year custodial sentence handed down to former Ngwempisi Member of Parliament Mthandeni Dube.

A nation’s capacity for mercy is revealed not merely in the strict administration of justice, but in its ability to temper justice with humanity.

The King’s decision demonstrates precisely this wisdom.  It signals an embrace of national healing and the restoration of social harmony in the wake of painful political upheaval.

It now falls to the country as a whole and particularly to leaders and communities to welcome Dube back into society, ensuring that he feels the warmth of reconciliation and genuine acceptance.

For, in any society, the work of reintegration is as significant as that of pardon.

In considering this royal pardon, it is essential to revisit the events and circumstances that led to the imprisonment of Dube, as well as his fellow former parliamentarians, Mduduzi Bacede Mabuza and Mduduzi ‘Gaw’zela’ Simelane. These three men, inspired by their own political convictions, voiced arguments for the popular election of Eswatini’s prime minister, a cause which, though perhaps fuelled by genuine democratic ideals, was ultimately at odds with the constitutional status quo.

There can be little doubt that when they initiated their campaign for such reforms, Dube and his compatriots could not have foreseen the chain of events it would set in motion. Tragically, what began as calls for change outside the formal structures of Parliament grew to become a catalyst for national turmoil.

The civil unrest that broke out thereafter claimed the lives of over 40 citizens, caused injuries to scores more and led to devastations in property damage exceeding E3 billion.

Given the gravity of these outcomes, it is reasonable to surmise that the protagonists might not have embarked upon this course had they anticipated the resultant unrest and suffering. In every reflection, hindsight offers clarity as calls for reform must always be balanced with cognisance of existing legal frameworks and an acute awareness of the potential for unintended consequences.

Dube’s experience, one hopes, has become a powerful lesson not only for him, but for all those who seek constructive constitutional reform. The proposal to hold a popular election for the prime minister is, in itself, an idea that might surface in future debate. However, such a reform would stand in violation of the current Constitution of the Kingdom of Eswatini.

His Majesty’s office does not possess the unilateral authority to sanction this change without due constitutional amendments. To elect a prime minister directly, without the intervening steps of constitutional reform, would render the office and all its decisions legally void, exposing the foundation of government to challenge and litigation. In short, the proper approach would have been to campaign within the structures of Parliament for an amendment to the supreme law. It is for the people and their representatives, through an established legislative process and supermajority support, to effect such change, should the nation so wish.

Section 67 of the Constitution stipulates: “The King shall appoint the prime minister from among members of the House acting on recommendation of the King’s Advisory Council.” This clause ensures both order and continuity in governance. Had the King acted upon the calls for a popular election, this decision could well have faced immediate judicial challenge, not only from members of the King’s Advisory Council as a directly interested party, but from any citizen or group aggrieved by the breach of constitutional procedure.

Furthermore, should the Office of Prime Minister be filled in a manner contrary to constitutional dictates, it would invite a host of legal and practical complications. Every action or decision by such an officeholder could be contested as ultra vires—beyond legal authority—and thus unenforceable.

It bears emphasis that the three former MPs, Dube, Mabuza and Simelane would have been wise to dedicate their considerable influence to lobbying for a constitutional amendment, thereby securing reform through lawful and legitimate channels.

In constitutional democracies, the legitimacy of every action flows from strict adherence to the written law.

Had a popular election for prime minister been conducted in violation of the existing Constitution, it would have foundered on legal challenge. It is fortunate, therefore, that the State chose not to invoke Section 3(a)(b) of the Constitution, a provision stern in its gravity against those who seek to overthrow or unlawfully abrogate the supreme law. This section reads:

“Any person who—

(a) by himself or in concert with others by any violent or other unlawful means suspends or overthrows or abrogates this Constitution or any part of it, or attempts to do any such act; or

(b) aids and abets in any manner any person referred to in paragraph (a); commits the offence of treason.”

Merciful discretion prevailed. Such forbearance from the State, even at moments of intense challenge, demonstrates a preference for dialogue and national unity over retribution.

I must say that the royal Prerogative of Mercy is a constitutional tool invoked in numerous democratic and monarchical societies. Throughout history, heads of State around the globe have utilised this instrument, both to correct miscarriages of justice and to further national reconciliation.

Queen Elizabeth II, United Kingdom

Over the course of her reign, the late Queen exercised the royal Prerogative of Mercy on several occasions, either to shorten sentences or release prisoners altogether. Notably, in 1993, the Queen’s royal prerogative was invoked to reduce the sentences of the so-called ‘Birmingham Six’ after mounting evidence cast doubt on the safety of their convictions. This act was not only a correction of judicial error, but a healing gesture towards public confidence in justice.

President Cyril Ramaphosa, Republic of South Africa

In 2023, President Ramaphosa exercised his constitutional authority to remit the sentences of thousands of inmates, including the granting of parole to former President Jacob Zuma on medical grounds. The move was justified on grounds of human dignity and the need for social cohesion, following the country’s history of mass incarceration and political conflict.

President Barack Obama, United States of America

While not a monarch, the President of the USA possesses the power of executive clemency, closely akin to the royal prerogative.

President Obama famously granted commutations to hundreds of federal inmates during his tenure, particularly for those serving disproportionate sentences for non-violent offences. These acts reflected a conscious effort to inject humanity and proportionality into the justice system.

These examples stress that acts of mercy by heads of State are neither an aberration nor a concession to lawlessness. Rather, when wisely exercised, they are integral to the health of constitutional democracy and national healing. King Mswati III, therefore, stands within an honoured tradition in exercising this prerogative.

In the aftermath of national upheaval, countries must strive for social harmony and the reinvigoration of civic life. It is my conviction that there will be no further waves of civil unrest in Eswatini. The lived experiences from recent unrest marked by raids, curfews and intrusive roadblocks revealed how such crises disturb not only political operations, but the very rhythm of everyday life.

Eswatini’s socio-cultural landscape is underpinned by certain core customs and basic freedoms. Civil unrest, by its very nature, disrupts the following –

• The right to work and seek employment.
• The enjoyment of leisure pursuits, be they attending church, cultural festivities, football matches or social gatherings.
• The opportunity for agricultural labours and livestock rearing, upon which many livelihoods depend.
• The maintenance of family life and the nurturing of personal relationships.

These elemental activities form the bedrock of the Swati way of life. It is, therefore, improbable that the broader citizenry would countenance further strife that endangers these cherished routines. No one, it is clear, supports disturbance for its own sake or for goals that ultimately undermine national well-being.

The royal pardon of Mthandeni Dube is an invitation for national reflection. It signals a readiness to turn the page on a difficult chapter and to channel the vigour of political engagement towards lawful reform. It also places trust in the capacity of even formerly influential dissenters to return, wiser and better attuned to the fine balance between change and order.

Constitutionally, both King and citizen share the right and the duty to uphold and defend Eswatini’s supreme law.

Section 2(2) of the Constitution affirms: “The King and Ingwenyama and all the citizens of Eswatini have the right and the duty at all times to uphold and defend this Constitution.” The lesson for all those who wish to contribute to national progress is clear: Innovation must walk hand-in-hand with the law.

Let us, therefore, extend hands of compassion and support to Dube as he rejoins the national fold. Let his experience stand as a testament both to the perils of bypassing constitutional bounds and to the restorative potential of national mercy.

In sum, the King’s act of royal clemency has drawn into focus some of the most vital features of constitutional governance - the sanctity of the rule of law, the possibility of lawful reform and the enduring place of compassion in public life.

Let us commend the King, not only for his act of pardon, but for reaffirming the traditions that connect Eswatini to a broader community of nations—nations where heads of State exercise mercy as a force for healing and hope.

Finally, let us seize this moment as citizens and leaders alike to deepen the nation’s commitment to lawful change, collective resilience and national unity.

I thank you!

His Majesty King Mswati III ought rightly to be applauded for exercising magnanimity in pardoning and revoking the 18-year custodial sentence handed down to former Ngwempisi Member of Parliament Mthandeni Dube (R). (Pic: File)