[3] In 2012, the African Commission on Human and Peoples' Rights (ACHPR) issued a sharp criticism of Eswatini's human-rights record, calling on the Swazi government to honor its commitments under international law in regards to freedom of expression, association, and assembly.
[3] Human-rights problems in Eswatini include, according to a 2011 report by the U.S. State Department, "extrajudicial killings by security forces; mob killings; police use of torture, beatings, and excessive force on detainees; police impunity; arbitrary arrests and lengthy pretrial detention; arbitrary interference with privacy and home; restrictions on freedoms of speech and press and harassment of journalists; restrictions on freedoms of assembly, association, and movement; prohibitions on political activity and harassment of political activists; discrimination and violence against women; child abuse; trafficking in persons; societal discrimination against members of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) community; discrimination against mixed-race and white citizens; harassment of labor leaders; restrictions on worker rights; and child labour in Eswatini".
[4] In August 2011 the International Monetary Fund urged Eswatini's government to implement fiscal reforms to address its deepening crisis.
In that same month South Africa agreed to loan Eswatini $355 million on the condition that it institute political and economic reforms.
[6] In 2011, according to Human Rights Watch, the harassment and surveillance of civil society organizations by police intensified, with activists being "arrested, detained, and tried under security legislation" and charged with treason and other offenses.
"Civil society activists and government critics have reported increased incidents of harassment, searches, and seizures of office materials, as well as monitoring of electronic communications, telephones calls, and meetings by the authorities", noted HRW, which added that activists are often subjected to excessive force, torture, and other ill treatment, and that there is no "independent complaints investigation body...for victims of police abuses".
Local government is principally in hands of tribal chiefs who also supervise volunteer rural “community police,” who have the authority to make arrests for minor offenses.
[6] The constitution includes strongly worded guarantees of fundamental freedom, but it also permits the government to restrict or suspend these rights.
Amnesty International points out that "provisions in the STA are sweeping and imprecise while the penalties for breaches are severe", with the term "terrorist act" in particular being defined very broadly.
Police officers above a certain rank can search private premises without warrants if they profess to believe that evidence might be lost otherwise, and many homes and businesses are in fact entered without court authorization.
David Matse, then chairman of the Human Rights and Public Administration Commission, as saying in January 2010 "that police and soldiers appeared to be using a 'shoot-to-kill policy'....In cases where Amnesty International sought corroboration, the information clearly indicated that the victims were not posing a threat to life when they were fatally shot".
The freedom of assembly is strictly controlled, with police permission required, and often denied, for political meetings or public demonstrations.
[6] HRW maintains that the government of Eswatini "has intensified restrictions on freedom of association and assembly in the past few years", with police routinely dispersing and arresting participants in peaceful demonstrations.
HRW cited the case of a September 9, 2011, rally in Manzini, at which the police beat up leaders of the opposition Peoples' United Democratic Movement (PUDEMO).
Despite a general respect for religious freedom there is still a degree of societal discrimination, especially toward non-Christian faiths, although this may have roots in ethnic differences.
"Women married under the civil law provisions (the 1964 Marriages Act) are subject to the 'marital power' of their husbands", and are not permitted to independently manage property or sign contracts.
Women who marry under customary law are even more fully subject to their husband's "marital power", whose limits, Amnesty International says, "are unclear".
[5] Under both civil and tribal law, in short, women are subordinate to men, and their rights differ under the two legal systems, which have conflicting sets of legislation on such matters as marriage, custody, property, and inheritance.
[5] Rape is widely viewed by men as a minor offense and by woman as a shameful event that they prefer not to report.
Some Swazi feminists felt that the view taken of women by many Swazi men was reflected in a December 2012 Times Sunday column by Qalakaliboli Dlamini, who argued therein that most women who are subjected to violence have brought it on themselves and that "when a woman is battered, she may have caused more internal damage to the male who will have caused her external harm".
Although the constitution declares that women are not obliged to adhere to customs they oppose,[4] Amnesty International has objected that this formulation "places an undue burden on the individual woman, whereas international human rights law stipulates that it is the responsibility of the state to prohibit and condemn all forms of harmful practices which negatively affect women".
[5] In any event, despite the constitutional protection, women who refuse to undergo traditional long mourning periods are often treated as outcasts and may lose their homes and inheritances.
[6] Discrimination on the grounds of race, color, ethnic origin, tribe, or birth is technically unconstitutional, but is practiced by government bodies and society at large against whites and mixed-race persons, who experience difficulty securing official documents, from passports to building permits.
[6] Amnesty International notes that "access to justice for victims of human rights abuses has been undermined" since June 2011 "by a renewed crisis in the rule of law.
A senior High Court judge, Thomas Masuku, whose rulings have long contributed to the protection of human rights in Eswatini,[5] was subjected to blatantly unfair removal proceedings....These developments also set an ominous precedent for other members of the judiciary and have a direct impact on the overall independence of the functioning of the judiciary in Swaziland."
In a March 2012 statement, Amnesty International said that "concrete and immediate measures to guarantee the independence and impartiality of the judiciary" that had been promised by Eswatini were "urgently needed", given that "the protection of human rights and access to justice for victims of human rights violations continues to deteriorate through what is in effect a crisis in the rule of law".
Another directive places control over the daily allocation of cases for hearings, including those on the urgent roll, exclusively in the hands of the Chief Justice.
[6] In the past, children lived with their mothers at the female detention facility, detainees are held alongside convicted criminals, and underage offenders are imprisoned with adults.