Eswatini needs to respect international law

7+( first session of the 12th Parliament of the Kingdom of Eswatini was recently inaugurated by His Majesty King Mswati lll where he outlined priority areas to be addressed by Cabinet within the next five years and, possibly, beyond.

An area that seems not to have received the attention it deserves over several past administrations relates to the government’s apparent failure in many cases to adhere to various international and regional agreements, conventions and protocols to which it is a signatory.

It would have been nice to hear the Head of State remind the three arms of government on the importance of government keeping pace with submission of reports to international bodies as mandated by the relevant agreements and conventions which the country has ratified, and to ensure strict adherence to the relevant protocols in governance.

For example, despite the fact that there have been numerous reports of torture of citizens by the country’s security forces over the years, the Times of Eswatini SUNDA< of February 25, 2024 reported that over the past 20 years since the country ratified the United Nations Convention Against Torture (UNCAT) in 2004, the Ministry of Justice and Constitutional Affairs (MoJCA) has yet to submit a report on torture of citizens by security forces, to the treaty body.

As if that’s not bad enough, rarely, if ever, has the MoJCA been heard to condemn and/or investigate alleged acts of torture, let alone rebuke and/or charge those responsible for violating the rights of victims of torture and other forms of abuse in the country.

Indeed, as far back as January 15, 2023, the Times of Eswatini SUNDA< reported on how an international human rights organisation noted that authorities in Eswatini continued to use excessive force and the threat of violence against activists and critics, some of whom were assaulted and harassed. As recently as a week or two ago, it was reported in one issue of the Times of Eswatini how four inmates at His Majesty’s Correctional Services (HMCS) had complained of being tortured and denied access to prescribed medication they needed on a day to day basis.

In all these reports, never was the MoJCA once heard to comment on the appropriateness, or lack thereof, as alluded to earlier, of the actions meted out to the inmates and others before them. If the MoJCA, regarded as an important entity in the Judiciary, fails to monitor and take appropriate steps to at least verify these reports and take appropriate action, what guarantee does the nation have that an accurate and truthful report will be submitted to UNCAT?

It is our understanding that the primary responsibility for the protection of human rights, including the safety and welfare, of the citizens of Eswatini, lies squarely on the shoulders of the MoJCA.

STANDARDS

Bodies such as the United Nations exist to establish international standards whereby monitoring mechanisms, such as the report which the MoJCA hasn’t submitted in twenty years, are used to ensure that those standards are adhered to or complied with.

Failure by States to submit relevant reports, in particular those which form part of an international agency’s monitoring mechanism of measuring compliance, or the lack thereof, with protocols of which a nation is a signatory, conveys the impression that

a) Either the delinquent State doesn’t care about fulfilling its obligations as a member of the civilised group of nations attempting to ensure that human beings are adequately protected against violations of their rights by governments and/ or certain government agencies, particularly after human suffering experienced by millions during such globally destabilising events like the Second World War (WW2), or

b) The delinquent State does not consider it important to comply with international protocols protecting the world’s citizens, including its own, from basic forms of injustice, this premised on humankind’s collective agreement, belief and acknowledgement that past infliction of human suffering such as that experienced at various times in the history of mankind, never be repeated.

If, indeed, our government is guilty on count (a) or (b), or both counts, this is testament to the fact that politically, government sees itself as unaccountable to its citizens. Also, it would seem, the government does not see itself as politically accountable to its international and regional partners with whom it enters into various agreements and conventions.

As far as (a) above is concerned, by ignoring reports on acts of torture and other abuses committed by security forces in the country’s prisons and elsewhere, the government cannot avoid being seen to be endorsing, condoning and complicit in acts of torture, the very act it signed up to fight against as a signatory of UNCAT. Of equal concern is the silence of Eswatini’s Human Rights Commission on the human rights abuses mentioned above.

As far as (b) is concerned, the Kingdom of Eswatini’s image as a State worthy of respect internationally is put in serious doubt when the government is seen to be blatantly disregarding the requirement to submit relevant reports and violating the conventions it signed up to uphold.

By failing to submit reports regularly and in a timely fashion, authorities open themselves to suspicion and accusations of lack of transparency in the country’s human rights record. This, in turn, impacts negatively on the country’s image as a desirable foreign direct investment destination. Furthermore, any perceptions of lack of transparency in the country’s human rights record may, in the short and long-term, prove antethetical to conduct consistent with that of a country with ambitions of reaching First World status in this century.

With regard to regional partnerships, it is worth recalling that when President Cyril Ramaphosa came to Eswatini as Chairperson of the Southern African Development Community (SADC) Troika on Peace and Security, immediately following the June, 2021 social unrest, Eswatini’s authorities were literally falling over themselves in their eagerness to accept help in putting out the flames of unrest, making all kinds of commitments related to social and political reforms, including promises to convene an all-inclusive national dialogue as soon as possible.

However, as soon as calm had been restored to the land based on undertakings made by the government, the administration reneged on its promise of convening an all-inclusive national dialogue.

Not only that, it may look like the SADC Secretariat was kept out of the loop regarding government’s plan to wiggle out of convening an all-inclusive national dialogue by convening Sibaya and manipulating the agenda to satisfy, however incompletely, the criterion of what constitutes a ‘dialogue’.

Additionally, an earlier statement declaring that Eswatini had resolved ‘on its own’ some of the issues related to the June 2021 unrest, especially at a time when engagement and sharing of views between the country’s authorities and the SADC Organ Troika were ongoing regarding accommodation of political formations in a future political dispensation, unfortunately created and conveyed the impression that the Kingdom of Eswatini had decided to embark on a ‘go it alone’ strategy with regard to addressing contentious issues related to the June, 2021unrest.

PROVISIONS

The country’s authorities need to always keep in mind that signing conventions and flouting certain provisions in those conventions if and when it suits the country, endangers the long term security of the country and other countries.

For example, the governments of Mozambique and the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) are currently embroiled in efforts to quell uprisings involving resource-rich areas in those countries. As signatories to the SADC Mutual Defence Pact, military contingents, one to Mozambique and the other to eastern DRC, were dispatched from South Africa, assisted by East African forces in the eastern DRC. As a signatory to the SADC Mutual Defence Pact, what support can the country rely on in view of Eswatini’s sometimes inconsistent and ‘semi-independent’ foreign policy positions with regard to agreements on cooperation in security and other areas? If Eswatini were to be overwhelmed by an insurgency, this would no doubt spill over to surrounding states, jeopardising the security of those states. Success in foreign policy requires recognition of the interdependence of states in matters of security, economics, the fight against various crimes like money laundering etc. whose impact is international. Therefore, respect for, and recognition of, other states as important partners in some existential issues in one’s home country makes it incumbent upon governments to conduct their foreign affairs circumspectly.

For example, it has been reported that members of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) alliance, a defence pact created immediately after WW2, have expressed serious concern about a possible Trump presidency after Donald Trump, as the Republican Party frontrunner nominee for the presidency of the United States of America in the presidential elections of November, 2024, sent shockwaves reverberating within the NATO alliance.

Mr. Trump is reported to have declared that he would deny any European country military support or assistance if that country was in arrears with regard to its mandated financial commitment to maintenance of the alliance’s military apparatus.

In view of the ongoing Russia/ Ukraine war, some European countries suddenly see themselves as vulnerable to territorial encroachment by a superior military adversary such as what has happened in Ukraine. Whereas the NATO alliance, since the end of WW2, protected the sovereignty and territorial integrity of European States, the integrity of the alliance will be put in serious jeopardy if a superpower like the United States of America withdraws necessary military and logistical support in the face of aggression by one militarily superior European State against a weaker NATO partner.

By violating post-WW2 NATO alliance agreements, the United States of America risks finding itself isolated if China and Russia embarked on a simultaneously co-ordinated two-pronged aggressive move, whatever form the aggression would take. Would European countries feel obliged to come to the aid of the Americans if Donald Trump’s no-pay no-protection policy comes to fruition?

As some analysts have pointed out, Mr. Trump’s no-pay no-protection proposal to members of NATO fails to recognise the interdependence of nations with regard to security and other matters. Likewise, failure by Eswatini to respect and adhere to international and regional agreements, pacts and conventions renders the country vulnerable and less able to resist destabilising forces and circumstances that are likely to lead to weakened social cohesion and national security.

Strengthening of the SADC-Kingdom of Eswatini relationship weakened by one or two perceived possible diplomatic missteps can only be to the mutual benefit of the KoE, SADC and the alliance as a whole.