SECTOR 1 “On non-controversial matters, such as those of health or agriculture, people can express themselves freely in Swaziland, but not if they are talking about politics or the royal family. In fact, any issue related to the government is generally censored.” There is a general awareness that communication mediums - including telephone calls and e-mails - of high-profile activists may be monitored by Swaziland’s national security apparatus, while the police and community leadership (the chiefs) keep a close eye on well-known human rights activists. The monitoring of communication is legalised through the 2010 Electronic Communications Act. Swazis may express themselves freely in small groups of people with whom they feel safe, but they generally do not do this in the public domain. Mention was made of the growing trend of using social media (Facebook, WhatsApp, Twitter) to express themselves more freely. Commentators use their own names on these social media platforms when commenting on general topics but revert to pseudonyms when writing on issues pertaining to the royal family “There may be a marked increase in people speaking out through social media, but what is the point if the media is not free?” Journalists have been known to have photographs deleted from their cameras in controversial situations. An example is when police took action against a journalist who had been photographing members of a community during an uprising against their chief. Journalists are often called in for ‘friendly chats’ with senior politicians, and reminded of their mandate and Swaziland’s history of newspapers being closed down by the powers-that-be. The prime minister and other officials have warned members of the media that publishing criticism of the monarchy is an act of treason. “The fear is there because of the repercussions.” The country’s common law also includes defamation laws, which can make journalists more cautious about expressing themselves freely. However, it is not only political leaders and police that members of the public and journalists need fear, as freedom of expression is clearly curtailed at various levels. There have been incidents in which ordinary people have taken the law into their own hands if they suspect political dissent. During the seven-week-long teachers strike in 2012, for example, “a teacher was almost killed by one of his own” for being suspected to be a journalist. There is also considerable suspicion among ordinary people of government spies infiltrating, for example, union meetings and media organisations. This curtails freedom of expression internally. 16 AFRICAN MEDIA BAROMETER Swaziland 2014