System sets itself up for failure

Madam,

From a superficial glance, the current system of governance has good intentions.

According to the Constitution and its fierce proponents, it endeavors to ensure that services devolve from central government to the people at grassroots level.

It is supposed to dispense with the adversarialness which is the salient hallmark of modern politics.

Under this system of governance, there are no political parties and no notion of an opposition.

Men and women, educated and uneducated are voted into the Legislature and are supposed to represent emaSwati from all corners of the country, which is organised, for purposes of elections and development, into 59 constituencies, otherwise known as tinkhundla.

ASPIRATIONS

These individuals each come with diverse views and service delivery aspirations that are informed by the needs of the electorate.

Some of them are appointed to form Cabinet.

The rest of the seats in both houses are then filled by the appointing authority.

That pretty much is how the two arms of government; the Legislature and the Executive are put together.

These arms are supposed to be working in tandem, each with its distinct roles, for the betterment of the populace.

They are supposed to play oversight roles, each to the other.

The appointing authority has a very prominent role in setting the agenda and approving what goes and what doesn’t.

That is the marriage between the monarchy and the ballot, if I were to oversimplify this our unique system of governance whose proponents insist the world is in awe of and that countries are studying it closely with intentions of adopting same.

UNCONFIRMED

The veracity of these claims remains unconfirmed unless I’m just suffering from ignorance in that area.

That being said, our system of governance is not that simple to understand.

Not to its custodians, architects, subjects and the international community.

Long has government made this realisation and in curing this, many officials have suggested that it be taught in schools.

They have argued strongly that this would be the perfect solution to the never-ending calls for reforms that would see the country embracing multiparty pluralism.

But does that really solve the problem? I think not.

Any system of governance is worth its salt only when it upholds human rights and delivers services the citizens expect.

Fundamentally, all people want to know that their taxes and their country’s resources can finance quality education, good road infrastructure, healthcare and support an economy that provides jobs and an environment where business can thrive.

CERTAINTY

Additionally, people want to have a voice on how their country is governed and have certainty that structures such as courts and law enforcement are functional, operate on the basis of a clear set of rules and are reasonably predictable.

The first set of expectations is arguably the most prominent because they speak to human needs.

If a government falls short on that score, then it loses creditability and legitimacy.

There will always be attacks on it and people will reject and even revolt against it.

Sadly, it is on that very score that our home-brewed Tinkhundla System fails, and spectacularly so.

And no amount of educating our children about it can save it.

So many years after it was conceptualised, decentralisation, which is supposed to be the one selling point for Tinkhundla, is still happening at a snail’s pace.

At a huge cost, people still have to travel from far-flung areas to towns for some services which should by now be available at tinkhundla centres.

CONVERGE

EmaSwati have often been told that it is at these centres where people should be allowed to converge to speak free and openly about socio-political issues that affect them. That is still not the case.

Our once celebrated education system has been so run down to the extent that it now remains fodder for the majority of emaSwati to whom the private school alternative is a luxury they can ill-afford.

The least said about the health system, the better. I could go on and on chronicling the failures of this system. This system sets itself up for failure, owing to the lack of competitiveness in its design as well as the centrality of power. MM