MBABANE: The General Council of the Bar of South Africa has described lawyer Thulani Maseko as a brave defender of human rights who made personal sacrifices for the advancement thereof.
In a public statement sent to this Swaziland News this week,Senior Counsel Myron Dewrance, the Chairperson of the General Council of the Bar of South Africa said during his career, the assassinated lawyer was pursued by the Government of Eswatini for his strong beliefs and unwavering commitment to protect and promote the rights contained in the Bill of Rights.
In the statement Senior Advocate Dewerance quoted Maseko’s affidavit where he was challenging politically motivated sedition charges against him.
“In terms of section 2 of the Constitution, all laws that are inconsistent with it are null and void and of no force and effect.
I have read the Sedition and Subversive Activities Act 46 of 1938 and have realised that the Act is unconstitutional on the ground of its wide and overbroad wording, and that it gives the police and Director of Public Prosecutions unreasonably wide powers and discretion to arrest and charge.It is this wideness and overbroadness that makes the Act unconstitutional, in that the definition of Sedition and Subversive Activities casts a wide net, so much so that virtually every form of utterance qualifies to be such only in the opinion of the Director of Public Prosecutions.In my view, this is contrary to the principles of democracy in that, in a democratic dispensation, which Swaziland claims to be, citizens must have the capacity to express themselves, even if their views are unpopular with the government of the day.In other words, those in public office must tolerate views and opinions even if they disagree with them, although such views may be sensitive. This is the strength of a democratic and constitutional state.”
These are the words that are contained in the affidavit of Thulani Maseko when he challenged the constitutionality of the provisions of the Sedition and Subversive Activities Act No 46 of 1938 in the Swaziland High Court. Thulani argued that the Act was null and void on the grounds of inconsistency with section 1, as read together with sections 2 and 24 of the Eswatini Constitution on the basis that it was overbroad. Thulani was charged for exercising his right to freedom of expression. In his affidavit, he further stated the following:
“I have merely been arrested for having allegedly expressed an opinion about the alleged bombing of the Lozitha Bridge, for suggesting that the bridge in future be named after my friends Musa John Dlamini and Jack Govender, whom it has been widely suggested, were blown away by the explosives on attempting to bring down the bridge.
However, I am not aware that MJ and Jack were blown away by that bomb as widely suggested.
Suggesting that MJ and Jack died from their own bomb is not the only theory or inference that may be drawn from this occurrence. This however, marked a sad day for Swaziland. No matter how the government condemns this, the history of Swaziland will never be the same.”
The Senior Counsel said Thulani argued that the charges were politically motivated because the alleged statements did not constitute a criminal offence. The charges were brought in order to “shut up those who are advocating peaceful change. The intention is to demonise those different political views”.
Senior Advocate Myron Dewerance.