THE PROS AND CONS OF LOCKDOWN

“The world suffers a lot. Not because of the violence of bad people but because of the silence of good people” - Unknown.

It is still early days, to predict with certainty, the pros and cons of the global lockdowns put in place by many countries (our own kingdom included) that are affected by the spread of the deadly COVID-19, the virus which has wreaked havoc in many countries across the world. Strikingly though, there is a resounding consensus among influential, financial entities like the International Monetary Fund (IMF) that many countries will be hard hit by harsh, economic woes last experienced during the 2008-09 financial crisis. As a result of the pandemic, entities like the World Economic Outlook, project the global economy to contract by -3 in 2020. Frightening? You bet!

Lockdowns, according to Wikipedia.org, are emergency protocols usually employed to prevent people (or information) from leaving an area. They are initiated by people in positions of authority such as leaders of countries, for example, presidents, governors, et cetera. Initially to some of us, the word had less significance, unheard of, maybe?

Buzzword

As is the norm with human nature, and since the deadly advent of COVID-19 virus, the word has since become viral and a buzzword locally and globally, with some of us now having developed a hatred for it and associate the word with depriving us of our fundamental human rights like freedom of movement, association, and the likes, losing sight of the crucial fact that lockdowns are for our own good, designed to protect us from especially - like in the present scenario - threats posed by pandemics. The two most important, that is, in my books, cons of the lockdowns are the imminent, dire effects on the economies of those countries on lockdowns. The second one, sadly, is that in some countries, it has triggered a brutal, violation of fundamental human rights, perpetrated by law enforcement agencies that have been given authority by many countries’ governments to enforce lockdown directives. Frightening accounts of inhumane and degrading treatment at the hands of some law enforcement agencies members reported by the media, have struck fear in the hearts of many hapless citizens of some countries.

Locally, allegations of brutality by security agencies in enforcing lockdown directives continue to rear their ugly, brutal head. As we continue to be under the suffocating spell of the lockdown, the alleged brutality gets uglier and frightening, by the day. Perplexing, alleged, accounts of beatings, torture and other degrading and inhumane acts, are not a nice read. Not at all.
Concerned citizens of the country, including human rights advocates, have raised their ire and concern at these unconstitutional and barbaric acts - in vain. Some of us have written articles in the media, condemning in the strongest terms possible these acts. They continue unabated. The most recent and prominent incident of brutality is none other than the alleged, violent attack on one of the country’s top lawyers. According to last Tuesday’s Eswatini Times article, the prominent lawyer ‘stared death in the face after he was run over by his own car while allegedly being assaulted by armed members of the Umbutfo Eswatini Defence Force (UEDF)’. The rest, as they say is history. The lawyer escaped, or rather, landed in the hospital with fractured ribs.

According to the stipulated regulations which have been set out by authorities to govern adherence to the control of the spread of the coronavirus, Section 25 (1) spells it out in clear, concise English that: “In order to contain the spread of COVID-19, a gathering of more than 20 people are prohibited ... It goes on to make a provision that a person who contravenes a provision of the regulations commits an offence and shall on conviction be liable to a fine of E25 000 or a term of imprisonment not exceeding two years...

“Correct me please if I am wrong, dear reader; but after going over through this section with a fine-tooth comb, at first initially thinking maybe my worn-out, ravaged-by-age due to old age, eyes, I could have missed some crucial sections of the clear-cut wording of the section. I found no provision to the effect that, “failure to adhere to the regulations will result in security agencies using maximum force like breaking ribs, torture, etc, to enforce these regulations...”

BEATINGS

The million-dollar question which is in most citizens’ lips is: why the brutal beatings of violators of the regulations when provisions are clear-cut than fines or jail time are the alternative if people fail to adhere to the regulations? Some of us were deeply concerned by the deployment of the army in enforcing the regulations. It is the brutal truth that the army is not trained for policing work. They are mean and dangerous, trained to engage - and destroy. This is exactly what they are doing now on defenceless citizens. Can one blame them for exercising what they are trained for? I leave that to you, dear reader to answer.
What I can point out, with confidence and due respect, is that as I see it, the blame lies squarely in the hands of our government. There’s just no way you can unleash the army in policing citizens during peacetime. They are killing machines trained to ply their deadly trade in the killing fields that is war. By this unfortunate decision, the government is opening herself up to lawsuits. The loser? The taxpayer - in simple language, the very people being brutalised, paying costs of the brutality perpetrated on them. Ironical, is it not? Lest I forget, so far, there has been no official condemnation of the brutality. That is also brutal in a sense, is it not?

Lest I forget - again. Our famous Constitution in Chapter III on ‘Protection and Promotion of Fundamental Rights and Freedom’, proudly provides in Section 18(1) that, “The dignity of every person is inviolable, (2) A person shall not be subjected to torture or to inhumane or degrading treatment or punishment....’ I love our ‘Supreme Law’ of the country. Without any shadow of a doubt, it is an impeccably, painstakingly and meticulously crafted document. Problem? It is rarely adhered to by the people who matter most - our government.

Experts argue that the states of emergency or lockdowns might be abused by the unscrupulous or those governments with despotic tendencies. They caution that they can set an unpleasant precedent, which may violate fundamental human rights.  According to www.eurotopics.net, one expert pointed out that: “However, once precedence has been set, who can rule out the possibility that the same restrictions on fundamental rights will be reactivated again in the future in the name of another supposed emergency...?” This is a stark reality and it is hoped governments around the world will not take advantage of the fear induced by governments’ security agents, as they enforce lockdown regulations, and will not be used in the future to trample on the rights of citizens.

On a positive note, we appreciate the government’s relaxation of some lockdown regulations. News to the effect that 15 more business sectors will be allowed to operate is most welcome. These are classified as low-risk. A balancing act was definitely needed without compromising COVI-19 risks, where needed. It was imperative that while being careful not to let our guard down on the risks posed by the virus, the government also had to consider the imminent effects of the lockdown on the economy. It is very sad that small businesses like salons, second-and clothing hawkers ‘bodobha  phansi’, et cetera, have to remain closed. This will certainly affect those businesspeople who make ends meet through running such businesses.

Finally, may I put my head on the block by referring the reader back to the preamble of my article? We are human and are prone to  erring. No one is perfect. In life, there are situations that may arise from time to time like the current lockdowns, which are bound to restrict certain rights, from which we will reap immeasurable benefits in the long-term. Security agents deployed to enforce lockdown regulations are also human.

DIABOLICAL

My question is: what manner of diabolical spirit drives our very own, so-called protectors to brutalise the very people they are supposed to protect? How do they feel as they use maximum force, breaking their fellow-men’s ribs, whipping defenceless women, subjecting them to harsh torture, all in the name of enforcing regulations?

What prevents them from engaging violators, pointing out the folly of breaking the lockdown regulations? Is violence the solution? Why fail to arrest them, allowing the courts of the land to charge, fine or jail such violators? We are all God-created and according to my biblical understanding, God abhors violence and the shedding of blood. He puts it succinctly clear that, in front of the coming Judgment Seat, everyone – leaders, security agents, the ungodly – will come before the Judgment Seat and have to give an account of all his/her actions on earth.
If good men remain silent, it makes cowards of them. May our leaders condemn such acts? None is more liSwati than others.
 Shalom!

Post your comment

Your name:

Your e-mail address:

Add your comments:

Please enter the code you see in the image:

Image:

Code: