Mario Masuku and Maxwell Dlamini were arrested on 1 May 2014 after participating in a May Day gathering in Manzini. Masuku spoke at the gathering and Dlamini participated in the singing of songs, and both used the gathering to draw attention to various challenges facing Swaziland. They were charged with two charges of contravening the Suppression of Terrorism Act, and two charges of contravening the Sedition and Subversive Activities Act as a result of the statements they had made.
Masuku and Dlamini applied for bail soon after their arrest, but this was refused. In October 2014 they made a fresh application for bail based on the presence of new circumstances that had arisen since the initial refusal, and bail was again denied. They appealed the refusal to grant bail to the Supreme Court and was released by the Supreme Court in July 2016.
Masuku and Dlamini have also filed an application challenging the constitutionality of the two pieces of legislation under which they have been charged. This application has been joined with three other similar applications, and was before the High Court in 8 September 2015. Judgment was handed down by the High Court on 16 September 2016.
On 13 August 2024, the Eswatini Supreme Court handed down its long-awaited judgement in the case of Prime Minister of Eswatini and Another v Thulani Maseko and Six Others [2024] SZSC 88. The case is a consolidation of 4 cases brought between 2008 and 2014, which all challenged provisions of the Sedition and Subversive Activities Act of 1938 and the Suppression of Terrorism Act of 2008. The Supreme Court upheld both laws, albeit with a more restrictive reading of the offence of sedition to include an element of violence or disorder.
Court Papers:
Notice of Motion
Founding Affidavit
Confirmatory Affidavit
Expert Affidavit
Applicants’ Heads of Argument
Respondents’ Heads of Argument
High Court Majority Judgment
High Court Dissenting Judgment
Bail Application:
Dlamini Affidavit
Masuku Affidavit
Prosecution Affidavit
Replying Affidavits
Applicants’ Heads of Argument
Respondent’s Head of Argument
High Court Judgment
Social Media