Not surprisingly it is difficult to pick an outright winner of the elections held in the enigmatic and troubled kingdom of Swaziland last weekend.
Some say the opposition made a strong showing. Others assert that it was women who made the biggest inroads. There is no agreement either on the success or otherwise of the stayaway campaign.
Chief electoral officer Robert Thwala attempted a note of quiet sanity with an assurance that ”polling went smoothly, with no reports of violence or demonstrations”.
Probably the most noteworthy win was that of dissident Obed Dlamini in Manzini. A former prime minister who broke with the royal family, Dlamini became president of the banned Ngwane National Liberatory Congress (NNLC).
His organisation ignored the call by the Swaziland Democratic Alliance for an election boycott, even though the NNLC is part of an umbrella alliance of trade unions and human rights organisations.
Dlamini has yet to explain how he will work from within on pressing for democratic reform in a patently undemocratic Parliament.
Political observers say the most useful function he could perform is to get political parties unbanned and legalised.
The elections returned 52 members, and 10 more will be appointed by King Mswati III. Three more seats will be contested after pre-voting wrangles are obviated. The 65-member House of Assembly selects 10 senators to join 30 more members of the Upper House appointed by the king.
No fewer than five women were appointed to the Assembly — previous elections had male winners only.
Candidates campaigned without any party platforms, since no political opposition to the king’s rule by decree is allowed.
When it was suggested to Mswati, during his visit to Japan earlier this month, that there was growing opposition in Swaziland to his absolute rule, he smiled sweetly and replied: ”You must be talking to different people than I am. The people tell me they really want a king.”
The candidates resorted to promising jobs and developmental projects.
Celebrity candidates — football players, radio personalities, a fashion show producer and a gospel singer — thrived in this apolitical environment.
The elections showed that the king’s men are not popular with the masses. Only one of 17 Cabinet members appointed by Mswati succeeded in winning his seat.
The king insists that his show-of-hands Tinkundla system is democratic. While this system allows Swazi elders to express or support a view by popular acclaim, their wishes can be overturned at the whim of the king.
Those who oppose this have been subjected to beatings, human rights groups have frequently reported.
Jan Sithole, the secretary general of the Swaziland Federation of Trade Unions, described the elections as nothing more than an advert for job opportunities in a country plagued by high levels of unemployment.
Western diplomats said they were adopting a wait-and-see approach, but were not expecting any dramatic change.
Some diplomats say the opposition missed an opportunity by not participating. They believe this poll would have hoisted half a dozen or more opposition figures into Parliament form where they could have worked for change.
”By not participating, they have effectively removed themselves from the political scene until the next poll, in five years time,” said a Western envoy.
The House of Assembly advises the king, but plays a more prominent role in development issues. Sithole insists that the system has failed and that the elections will not produce any meaningful change.
He said the turnout of 229 000 voters in a country of 1,2-million people showed the boycott had been successful. The turnout was nevertheless larger than for the 1998 election.
The opposition says it will redouble its efforts for diplomatic pressure on the royal house — particularly from South Africa and the United States.
Swaziland is negotiating a free trade agreement with the US along with South Africa and other members of the Southern African Customs Union.
It is therefore eager to impress Washington with its stability and to avoid any overt human rights infractions since these might cost it the access afforded under the African Growth and Opportunity Act.