SOME MPS SUPPORT NEUTRAL VENUE FOR DIALOGUE

MBABANE – Some Members of Parliament (MPs) say they support the calls for the national dialogue to be held on neutral ground or tinkhundla centres other than Sibaya.

Last week, the MPs called upon government to ensure that dialogue took place immediately. It was during the debate of the Prime Minister’s (PM) Office’s first quarter of the financial year report, which took place in the House of Assembly. Yesterday, the MPs were engaged by this publication on how and where the dialogue that they were calling for should be held. This was brought about by the fact that government said the dialogue would be held in accordance with the Constitution, meaning Sibaya would be called, while some members of the progressives are against this view.

Dialogue

In an interview with this publication, Lomahasha MP Ndumiso Masimula said the only dialogue they would accept would be one held on neutral ground as compared to Sibaya. He said the reasons they were opting for neutral ground was that when it came to Sibaya, there were traditional limitations. He said traditionally, there were people who were not allowed to get inside Sibaya and these included women in mourning gowns as they were often identified as Bamnyama. Masimula said another reason he was suggesting another venue was that Sibaya was far from some areas such as his constituency (Lomahasha).

Reasons

He said in as much as when Sibaya was called, government would provide people with free transport, but some might not be in a position to travel the long distance for various reasons. The MP then said tinkhundla centres would be a better option whereby everyone would be free to go and speak their views. He said in his opinion, in the tinkhundla centres, constituents would be able to voice out their opinions without fear. He said in such a set-up, there should be a select committee that would collect the people’s views and compile them for submission to the authorities.  He said it was worth noting that the committee should be all inclusive.

Mtsambama MP Simosakhe Shongwe said he was also against the idea that the dialogue should be held at Sibaya. He said there was a need to define what a dialogue was. He said a dialogue had to be a two-way street where both parties spoke in order to reach an agreement. Shongwe said if the dialogue was to be held at Sibaya, it would be impossible for the two-way approach to exist, but it would be more like a monologue. He said as far as he knew, there was never anything said at Sibaya that was ever implemented except the appointment of the prime minister. 

The legislator said the dialogue should be all inclusive. He said some people were not for the idea of going to Sibaya hence their views might not be heard.  He said people, including himself, had never gone to Sibaya and would never go there, but they were still emaSwati and they should not be left behind in national issues.  Shongwe added that what was happening in the country was no longer acceptable. He said the dying of security forces was painful in as much it was also painful that civilians died last year June because of the security forces approach.

Painful

He said it was painful that members of the security forces were being used in politics, as politics were not the duty of the forces but rather their duty was to maintain peace and order. He added that politics should have been left to the politicians and the populace to dialogue about and come out with lasting solutions other than the use of force by government. “We are not happy with the many souls being lost each and every day,” said the MP.   
Zakhele Magongo, Nkhaba MP, said it was up to the people to decide how they wanted the dialogue to be held. He noted that what mattered was that the dialogue should be held in order to come up with lasting solutions to the current political issues in the country.

Ndzingeni MP Lutfo Dlamini said in as much as he could not direct where the dialogue could be held, be it Sibaya or anywhere else, the most important thing was the dialogue itself. He said dialogue had always been emaSwati’s way of life from time immemorial. “We need it more now and as I said, we need to talk more about going forward,” said Dlamini. Dlamini said apart from this, he believed there was a need to urgently get the much needed jobs and entrepreneurial spirit for the highly skilled youths that have been produced. He said there was a need to overhaul the running engine.

He added that as a government, this was possible, but again there was a need to collectively put brains and creativity together and do it. “It’s possible but we need the Executive to take the leadership and as the Legislature and electorate, we stand ready to assist. The prime minister is entrusted with the constitutional responsibility to ensure that we as a nation, regardless of our different ideologies and beliefs, come together and move towards a win-win end,” said the MP.

Violence

Dlamini added that the absence of violence could make things much easier when it came to the dialogue. Dlamini said it was also important to acknowledge the Constitution when it came to the dialogue. He said there was a provision which speaks about Sibaya. He said the Constitution, which is the supreme law of the country, stated that in such circumstances there would be the need to go to Sibaya at the end of the day. He cited Section 232 of the Constitution. Dlamini said it was worth noting that dialogue was not a one day thing but a process, hence it had many stages which may include but not limited to Sibaya.

KuMethula MP Derrick Masuku said government should take the dialogue to the people so they can speak about what they want. He said it was up to the people to choose the venues where they wanted the dialogue to be held. Masuku said his desire was that the dialogue be held as soon as possible in order to resolve the situation in the country. Other MPs, who requested to speak on condition of anonymity, said tinkhundla centres were ideally a starting point for the dialogue. “Let us make use of where we come from, the constituency. Let’s start talking there. Our submissions will then be taken to the decision makers,” one MP said. Another stated that most people were not shy to speak in their territory, hence the constituency centres were ideal.

Post your comment

Your name:

Your e-mail address:

Add your comments:

Please enter the code you see in the image:

Image:

Code: