legal challenge is to be made in Swaziland to declare the kingdom’s Suppression of Terrorism Act (STA) unconstitutional.
People who have protested for democratic change in Swaziland have been arrested and charged under the act for ‘sedition’. No political Party is allowed to contest elections in Swaziland and all organisations that call for democratic change have been branded ‘terrorists’ under the STA.
People have been charged under the STA for a number of alleged crimes, including carrying banners displaying the names of banned organisations, wearing berets or T-shirts with slogans written on them, and praising individuals who have stood up for democracy.
The a href=”http:swazimedia.blogspot.comsearchlabelSuppression%20of%20Terrorism%20Act” target=”_blank”STAa was introduced in November 2008 following an attempted bombing of the Lozitha Bridge, near one of the King’s 13 palaces in September that year.
Shortly after the STA came into force Amnesty International and the International Bar Association’s Human Rights Institute (IBA-HRI) called for its immediate repeal or amendment.
More recently in June 2014, the United States withdrew preferential trade rights from Swaziland because, among other things, it had not amended the STA.
In 2009, a href=”http:swazimedia.blogspot.com200901call-to-repeal-swazi-terror-act.html” target=”_blank”Amnesty and IBA-HRIa said a number of provisions in this Act were ‘sweeping and imprecise’.
They said in a statement that the Swazi Government warned of heavy penalties for ‘associating’ with certain groups, which had been declared to be terrorist ‘entities’ under the law. They said this was ‘contributing to an atmosphere of uncertainty and of intimidation amongst a wide range of civil society organizations’.
a href=”http:www.amnesty.orgenlibraryinfoAFR550012009en” target=”_blank”The statement reada, ‘Amnesty International and the IBA-HRI are gravely concerned that key provisions in this anti-terrorism law are inherently repressive, breach Swaziland’s obligations under international and regional human rights law and are already leading to the violation of the right to freedom of expression, association and assembly.’
The statement also said the offences under the STA were ‘defined with such over-breadth and imprecision that they place excessive restrictions on a wide range of human rights – such as freedom of thought, conscience and religion, freedom of opinion and expression, freedom of association and freedom of assembly – without adhering to the requirements of demonstrable proportionality and necessity.’
In June 2014, the United States withdrew a preferential trade agreement from Swaziland under the Africa African Growth Opportunity Act (AGOA) after the kingdom, ruled by King Mswati III, sub-Saharan Africa’s last absolute monarch, failed to make reforms on political and workers’ rights, which included amendments to the STA.
a href=”http:www.amnesty.orgenlibraryinfoAFR550012009en” target=”_blank”The legal challengea which is spearheaded by the People’s United Democratic Party (PUDEMO) is expected to be heard at the Swaziland High Court on 1 December 2014.
Source : Swazi Media Commentary