Mr Jan Sithole

Jag har vid några tillfällen nämnt Jan Sithole som en stor kämpe för mänskliga och fackliga rättigehter som har fått utstå mycket på grund av detsamma. För att vi inte ska glömma hur historien ser ut så kopierar jag in en artikel skriven i Sunday Times, 17 juni 2007. På så vis kan vi som har varit i Genève på ILO:s konferens påminnas om vikten av fackligt internationellt arbete och ni som inte har besökt ILO:s konferens ännu och få ta del av Mr Sitholes historia och vad han har lyckats med genom sin långa kamp.

Jan Sithole: hero or villain?
Musa Hlophe
Sunday Times June 17, 2007


It is often said that history usually favours or is written by the victors.

This is more pronounced in the current debate over name changes which are taking place in South Africa as we speak. Opposition parties as well as independent commentators have alleged that the name change process in South Africa is being driven by the (ANC) and only recognises heroes or heroines from the ANC and its alliance partners.

Whether this claim is true or not is a matter of one’s judgement except that those who hold this perception, to them this represents a statement of fact.

I have been, of late, pondering over how history will portray Jan Sithole when he retires from union leadership. Of late there are already claims, some of these bordering on attacks on the person of Sithole, to the effect that Sithole has overstayed his welcome as a trade union leader.

In fact, some sections of the media have even gone to the extent of demonising the very name ‘JAN SITHOLE’. Some have complained that Sithole has monopolised the attendance at the ILO Annual Conferences in Geneva.

attacks

Of course in my view some of these attacks are as a result of people’s ignorance of how things work at that International Forum. It is a view based on people’s ignorance of the fact that it takes time for one to be effective and begin to deliver to one’s constituency at that level. Therefore I believe that if we were to criticise Jan, that such criticism must be based on what happens in Geneva.

That it takes time for one to build the necessary support system among his peers or her peers before one becomes fully integrated into the workings of the ILO Conference.

It is therefore not suprising to those of us who have had some experience of how that forum works, that it took Jan seven years to be fully functional at that level and thus began to deliver to his constituency in Swaziland. But the question remains; how will history judge Jan Sithole?

I believe that to be able to see whether history should judge Jan harshly ( as some section of the media together with some of Jan critics have ) or will Jan be held out as a hero? Now, what has Jan achieved in his time as the leader of the Swaziland Federation of Trade Unions?

To answer this question, one needs to trace back the history of the workers’ struggle in Swaziland from the winter of 1985 when Obed Dlamini retired from the position of Secretary General of the SFTU and handing over the leadership to Jan Sithole . During Obed’s time which dated back from 1978 – 1985, the SFTU was able to push for the ratification of about 31 ILO Conventions, eight(8) of which are called Core Human Rights Conventions, which include convention 87 on the Freedom of Association and Assembly, Convention 98 which is the right to collective bargaining and Convention 144 which is tripartite consultation , to mention but a few.

When Obed retired some of these conventions had been domesticated into local law through the enactment of the Employment Act 1980 as well as the Industrial Relations Act also of 1980.

But these two pieces of legislations were severely limited in that , for instance, reinstatement of unfairly dismissed workers was not mandatory and unions could only canvas per industry sector which means that there could only be one union per industry.

It took Jan, in 1994, to raise the level of awareness of these deficiencies in our law, and he did so armed with information from the reports of the ILO Committee of Experts, which, since 1982, had been complaining about the deficiencies or lack of protection in our law. It would appear that people with short memories have forgotten how Jan Sithole and his collegues packaged those concerns of the ILO into what they called ‘he popular 27 Demands’.

It is now history that the call for the 27 Demands was achieved through sweat and blood. Making those demands meant that workers under the SFTU did not only risk their pay by embarking on stay away protests but risked their lives as well as the repressive regime of the Tinkhundla System, in panicky mood, responded violently to meet these stay-aways.

We know how many times Jan Sithole and some of his colleagues were often beaten up and arrested. We also know that in those numerous arrests , Jan Sithole and his colleagues had to be shunted around the country. Often in the middle of the dark, by the police, so that their lawyers would not know where to find them the next day they went to consult and defend them .

But did all this harassment and brutality discourage Jan and his colleagues to pursue their 27 Demands? Again we know that those with short memories will have forgotten by now that instead of despairing , Jan and his colleagues fought on from 1994 to 1996 when then Minister of Labour, the late Albert Heshane Nhlanhla Shabangu ( and may his soul rest in peace) came out with the 1996 Industrial Relation Act .

Not satisfied with some of the highly repressive provisions of that Act , Jan Sithole and his colleagues took back to the streets by way of mass stay- aways, while Jan used the International Labour Conference to effectively canvas the case of the plight of the Swazi workers.

Because I was there listening patiently to how Jan passionately marshalled his case, I cannot easily forget how the International Community received his case.

In fact I can picture in my mind one woman from one of the Scandinavian countries standing up in tears, after listening to Jan’s heart rending presentation, to plead with the international community to lend its collective support to the just struggle of the workers of Swaziland .

It is now history that indeed the international community listened as a result of which excessive pressure was put to bear on the Swaziland Government to urgently reform its Labour Legislation. It is also now history that despite its evasive tactics in an effort to try to evade the pressure of the International Community, the Swaziland Government, under pressure of real threats of economic sanctions by the United States, the government eventually yielded to the just demands of the Swazi Workers.

boasts

As a result, Swaziland now boasts of one of the most progressive Industrial Relations Legislation in the Region – the Industrial Relation Act of 2000 as amended.

But who gets the credit for all these achievements? From what we see , it is not Jan Sithole and his colleagues but it is the Government of Swaziland that now enjoys the credit .

That they resisted the efforts to reform this law to a point where a young girl’s life was snuffed away during the government resistance is now being conveniently forgotten. But remember, those in power tend to dictate how history should be written.

It is because of this that the name of Jan Sithole is being vilified, dragged in the mud and often portrayed as a villain, by those who are ashamed to acknowledge his contribution to our good industrial relations and democracy. It is these people, including some section of the media who would like to have us believe that Jan deserves no praise for what he has achieved so far as a leader of the workers in Swaziland .

I believe this country owes a lot of gratitude to Jan Sithole for his courageous and sacrificial act in his defence of the rights of the workers of Swaziland and that of the world. Through his act of bravery even conservative employers in this kingdom were liberated. As we enjoy our labour rights , let us spare a thought of the sacrifice made by people like Jan Sithole to achieve these rights.