414/12 - Lawyers for Human Rights (Swaziland) v The Kingdom of Swaziland Communication 414/12 - Lawyers for Human Rights (Swaziland) v The Kingdom of Swaziland Summary of the Complaint 1. The Secretariat of the African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights (the Secretariat) received a Complaint on 24 April 2012 from Lawyers for Human Rights-Swaziland (the Complainant) against The Kingdom of Swaziland (Respondent State or Swaziland). 2. The Respondent State is a State Party to the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights (the African Charter or the Charter) having ratified the same on 15 September 1995. 3. The Complainant avers that the Swazi people in particular, political parties in general, and their members who desire to put in place a government of their choice through a multi-party system, have since 12 April 1973 suffered and continue to suffer irreparable harm as a result of the denial of free political activity and the banning of political parties to lawfully and effectively contest elections. 4. The Complainant states that Swaziland is an independent State having obtained independence from the Kingdom of Great Britain on 6 September 1968 under the Swaziland Independence Order, Act No. 50 of 1968 (otherwise known as the 1968 Independence Constitution). The Complainant states that the independence Constitution established a democratic form of government, provided for the rule of law, separation of powers and an independent judiciary. In Chapter II, the 1968 Constitution provided for a justiciable Bill of Rights which was enforceable by an independent judiciary. 5. The Complainant states that the rights articulated in the independence Constitution were subject to reasonable limitations. Quoting sections of the Constitution, the Complainant states that: the provisions in this Chapter shall have effect for the purpose of affording protection to those rights and freedoms subject to such limitations of that protection as are contained in those provisions, being limitations designed to ensure that the enjoyment of the said rights by any individual does not prejudice the rights and freedoms of others and public interest. Thus, the Complainant submits, limitation of rights was based on the respect of the rights of others and public interest within a democratic dispensation. 6. The Complainant avers that prior to independence, Swaziland held two national elections, one in 1964 and another in 1967. In these elections no opposition political party won a single seat in parliament. In both instances the King's political party, the Imbokodvo National Movement (INM) was the overall winner. It states that these elections were conducted on a multi-party basis. Among the political parties that contested were the United Swaziland Association (USA), the Swaziland Independent Front (SIF), the Swaziland Democratic Party (SDP), the Swaziland Progressive Party (SPP), the Ngwane National Liberation Congress (NNLC) and the INM. 7. The Complainant states that post-independence elections were held in 1972. They aver that to the surprise of the ruling INM, while it won the majority seats in parliament, one of the political opposition parties, the NNLC won three seats. This victory ushered a new era in the political history of the newly independent State, as it meant that for the first time there would be an official opposition inside parliament. It avers that it was the emergence of this opposition that led to a number of events in the country, resulting in the unlawful abrogation of the independence Constitution and its electoral system and laws. 8. The Complainant avers that the Government was unhappy with the opposition party, NNLC being in parliament, and decided to frustrate one of its members, Bhekindlela Thomas Ngwenya by declaring him a non-Swazi citizen. The Complainant submits that this was a violation of his fundamental rights as provided 1