Does debate overshadow urgent issues?
Before we delve into the interesting topic of disruptive leadership style currently occupying the House of Assembly, we woke up to sad news from NERCHA that HIV infections are at alarming levels. Yet Eswatini was a beacon of hope regarding turning a hopeless situation of the 90s and early 2000s into a ray of hope, having achieved the UN 95-95-95 before the 2030 deadline. Eswatini was at a level where HIV was no longer a public health crisis. We also thought issues of stigma were no longer an obstacle to prevention and seeking access to vital preventive treatment measures.
Also shocking was that the Church was being accused of her previous disruptive behaviour, where those who were on treatment were encouraged to stop taking ARVs in the hope of a miraculous cure from God’s healing power. I am a Christian from the Evangelical Church and I believe in God’s healing power. However, I don’t believe that a mere human can force God’s power to perform miracles.
I urge the Church bodies to discourage this disruptive behaviour from some man of God. Let us remember the slogan ‘HIV yindzaba yetfu sonkhe’. We dare not let our guard down.
Back to the topic for today. In the chambers of Eswatini’s House of Assembly, an ideological battle has taken centre stage. At the heart of the friction is Prime Minister (PM) Russell Mmiso Dlamini’s unabashed embrace of a ‘disruptive leadership style’, an approach he argues is vital to shattering bureaucratic inertia, rooting out entrenched corruption and realising His Majesty King Mswati III’s fast-tracked ‘nkwe’ mandate.
The PM’s stance is informed by development challenges which Eswatini is facing. As a leader of government business, the PM has a responsibility to steer government to deliver services that will change people’s lives. Hence, it is commendable that he has defined his approach to leadership, especially challenging the systems and processes that stifle progress. We all know that leadership is not a position, but it is how a leader influences change. Also, it is that both the PM and parliamentarians face the same public scrutiny at the end of their term. Of course, those elected are right to deliver development, which will count when they face the voters.
However, back-and-forth motions moved by lawmakers like Mbabane East MP Welcome Dlamini raise a fundamental concern: Is this style compatible with the consensus-based Tinkhundla System of Government or is it fanning the flames of political friction? While this debate on executive power and constitutional doctrine dominates headlines, a critical question emerges for ordinary emaSwati: Is the political theatre at Lobamba overshadowing the severe, day-to-day survival challenges facing the nation?
The PM defends disruption as a modernising tool, arguing that tradition and rapid socio-economic progress are not mutually exclusive. In his defence to Parliament, he pointed to macro-economic achievements: Poverty Reduction: A shift in national poverty rates down to 53.5 per cent; Economic Stabilisation: Inflation cooling to 2.6 per cent and key infrastructure advancements like the Mpakeni Dam and renewable energy investments, to mention a few.
Yet, some parliamentarians view this disruptive posture with scepticism, pointing to strained relationships across the Executive and Legislature, concerns over collective Cabinet responsibility and potential friction with local governance models.
Reality on the ground
- While political energy is expended debating executive methodology inside Parliament, daily life for many citizens across Eswatini remains defined by socio-economic pressure:
- Need for functional, accessible basic public services free of delays.
- Persistent supply shortages of vital medications and equipment in regional clinics
- Pervasive youth unemployment and limited micro-finance opportunities.
- Climate vulnerability, input cost burdens and local food security
- Persistent poverty, trapping many families in a vicious cycle.
- Social protection measures that have remained far below inflation
- A clash of leadership styles is not inherently negative.
It signals a healthily assertive Legislature demanding accountability from the Executive. The style of leadership exposed by the PM is informed by the need for government to deliver tangible development dividends for emaSwati.
Need to move beyond the debate
We, as the public, appreciate the robust debate, which is centred on governance outcomes that benefits the people. We implore that such debates should not turn inward, focusing on political posturing and then diverting crucial parliamentary time and administrative energy away from urgent legislative work. For emaSwati, the metric of successful governance is rarely the academic framing of a leadership style; it is whether clinics have medicine, young people can find jobs and clean water flows in their communities. Parliament and the Cabinet must ensure that in their debate over how decisions are made, they do not lose sight of what needs to be delivered.
Leave a comment