CONSTITUTION NOT WORTH PAPER IT’S WRITTEN ON

Over 15 years ago, as country, we embarked on a process of expressing our aspirations and defining of our political architecture through the Constitution making process.

Millions of Emalangeni went into this exercise to put in place commissions which steered this exercise, getting expertise from around the world to add value to the process as well as an attempt at consultations to get all emaSwati to make contributions. The mass democratic and labour movement today is happy to take credit for this process as they view it as one that happened as a result of their incessant demands, particularly as it formed part of the then Swaziland Federation of Trade Unions’ (SFTU) famous 27 Demands. Of course, there were many complaints with the manner in which the process was carried out.

The progressive movement saw it as a primarily royal project that would not serve the interests of the nation and some individuals, such as the late Mario Masuku, of the People’s United Democratic Movement (PUDEMO), turned down appointments to the Constitutional Review Commission (CRC) because they felt strongly that they should be in those positions, not as individuals, but as representatives of a collective. The same argument was raised by some who elected to boycott the exercise and would not contribute during the consultation stage, citing that the process would be enriched if there was space for people to make contributions as representatives of various sectors of society because getting views of all emaSwati would be impossible.

Those complaints were never entertained and more millions were spent attempting to reach every corner of the country for people to make their contributions. I can already imagine that this process left out thousands of the working class who could obviously not participate and this meant views of many of the educated emaSwati could not have pride of place in the final document. Towards the end of the process, more taxpayers’ funds were expended transporting in trucks and feeding those who could spare the time to go to Sibaya where more views were collected.

Guide

I remember very well while I was in high school listening over the radio as people made their contributions. I also remember how Prince David, then Chairperson of the Constitutional Draft Committee (CDC) was at pains trying to guide the contributions as people seemed at sea at what the process was about. Scores and scores of people kept talking of their struggles back home and what they wanted government to do to alleviate poverty. Others even used the process to ask for jobs. It was patently clear that thousands had not quite gotten the memo on the business of the day. The process came and went, the Parliament of the day had its chance to debate the document and sometimes ‘special messages’ from the throne were delivered to influence the process, and eventually a Constitution was presented at Sibaya.

The Commonwealth, which had provided technical assistance, hailed it as one of the best constitutions in the continent. Some traditionalists were of the view that it did not represent the views of emaSwati, citing what they said was under-cutting King’s powers. By the same token, the progressive movement was of the view that the document only served to entrench and fortify the 1973 Decree dispensation, with no fundamental shifts politically. Fast forward to 2024, the Constitution, with all its frailties, real or imagined, remains the supreme law of the land with all force of law.

Arguments

As a document that is an expression of national aspirations, all arguments conveniently ignored, it has to be respected and complied with. While no law, properly legislated and assented to, should be breached without consequences, breaching of the Constitution should carry even stiffer punishment. Regrettably, we seem to have little regard for the Constitution in this country. Our human rights record has always been on the spotlight for all the wrong reasons and our behaviour as a country suggests that putting in place this document was only but a political gimmick and just box-ticking.

If almost 20 years in this constitutional dispensation we pick and choose what to comply with and what we flout with impunity, it speaks volumes about how (not) seriously we take ourselves as a nation and this document that is losing its worth every day. The Constitution itself enjoins us all, without distinction, to uphold and protect it. Our leaders should lead us in this regard. Apologies and merely conceding that we are at variance with the spirit and letter of the law, while at best admirable in so far as it reflects that we know what the truth is, is not enough to inspire confidence in the sanctity of the law and respect of the will of the people. Let’s not erode trust in the one thing that we all should take refuge in.

Post your comment

Your name:

Your e-mail address:

Add your comments:

Please enter the code you see in the image:

Image:

Code: