Potential partners for funding

South African companies and institutions with branches in Swaziland do not want to fund projects similar to those that they are funding in South Africa. The reasons are always that “it is not in their line for funding”.

For many, the only potential funding partners for documentaries are in South Africa, as they can, for instance, apply for funding through the National Film and Video Foundation (NFVF).

However accessing those potential partners is seen as “self-defeating”. One commentator explains: “As the same 3 or 4 people keep producing most documentaries in South Africa, documentary makers in Swaziland feel like seeking a potential funding partner from South Africa is a “regressive step”. There is a frustrating belief indeed, the same commentator says: “that the same South African people are using resources from places like the NFVF to travel to foreign markets and, in a sense, they get themselves ingrained into any funding scheme… Or that the same producer will end being on a selection board for a foreign film fund and will always end up selecting other South African projects”.

The commentator concludes: “So for myself personally, I would rather not make any film if the only option of a potential funding partner is to throw myself into the minestrone pot… It’s a matter of principle because I honestly don’t believe that in all this time the only African documentaries are from South Africa, or sometimes Kenya, which also has its own film commission”.

Like in other places in Southern Africa, international NGOs, UN agencies and governmental bodies also are commissioning local producers to make films with messages promoting the activities or projects they are funding.

MISA Swaziland is a key partner to consider working with. The organisation has done commendable work on monitoring and documenting the media coverage in Swaziland.

The Clinton Foundation is funding projects in Swaziland.

Film schools, training programmes

There are no schools offering film-training programmes available for documentary makers in Swaziland.

The only institution providing training in the field in Swaziland is the Limkokwing University of Technology, which has recently been opened. However, for those without a bursary from the government, it is difficult to enroll in because the fees are prohibitive.

Therefore, many locals enroll in South African universities, as their fees are more affordable. Many also have to rely on external development programmes such as the Talent Campus at DIFF, in Durban, or other workshops and master classes like the FilmMart.

The government does not provide financial aid to those interested in studying documentary or filmmaking even though they do sponsor some study outside the country in other subjects.

Business management, technical and journalism schools interested in being involved with this initiative

The Limkokwing University of Technology

Festivals

The only film festival is the Golden Lion Film Festival, run by James Hall. The festival showcases short film and video dramas, animation, documentaries, musicals and comedies. The French Alliance Française, embassies and UNICEF have funded the festival that also has venues in Lesotho, South Africa and Mozambique. Beyond the festival itself, this organisation is dedicated to the advancement of film scholarship, both critical and theory throughout Southern Africa.

The festival director stated that a “major bank in Swaziland has asked the Gold Lion Film Festival to undertake a training programme to teach new media production techniques to Swazis who may wish to become filmmakers. They can at least post what they do on YouTube and other on-line outlets”.

One Swazi woman has developed a human rights festival project, targeting mainly women and girls. However she is still trying to find funding to implement the project and for training.

Professional, peer mentorship group: creative producers, line producers, directors, writers, editors

Local producers formed an association called the Independent Producers Association, but the organisation has failed to produce anything tangible.

One commentator adds, “There is no documentary industry in Swaziland so peer mentorship groups don’t exist”.

Camera, computer hardware, software and other tech-related companies in film

There are no equipment facility houses and many rely heavily on South Africa for equipment.

Swazi TV, the government owned television station, has film equipment but it’s not hiring out its equipment.

The country’s only existing private production studio, the Christian Media Centre, vets programmes being produced at its facilities to ensure that they are in line with the centre’s Christian moral codes. Such censorship does little to promote the kind of creativity and diversity that many respondents considered crucial to the development of a more professional and sustainable audio-visual sector.

A need was expressed to run workshops on the use of different equipment, especially during festivals.

The lack of training and equipment is a major stumbling block for many who are passionate about film production.

Sales companies, distributors advisory group

• There are none in Swaziland
• The only options for distribution are the movie rental outlets and some shops that sell
• Documentaries from other countries are generally not sold in

Advocacy partners

The Independent Producers Association is supposed to play that role but it is considered “disorganised and not active”.

Existing documentary and news archives

The only organisation with any real resources for archiving is the government owned television station. However, as someone stated, “what is archived is not so much the experience of ordinary Swazis but relates more to government events and major cultural or traditional anniversaries and events”.

All forms of distribution, including: broadcast, theatrical, internet, mobile TV, telecoms/mobile phone, mobile cinema, film/video clubs, etc.

The national TV seldom broadcast documentaries. Documentaries are generally seen on SABC (the South African national TV station) and, for those who can afford it, through the DSTV bouquet and other cable TV networks.

Swaziland has one private broadcaster, Channel Swazi, operated by a member of the royal family.

An estimated 83.3% of the Swazi population aged 10 years and over are tuning in to television once or more times per week. Swazi TV holds the highest number of weekly viewers – approximately 510 400, and is followed by SABC 1 with 431,200 viewers. ETV holds third place with 332 000 viewers, followed by Channel Swazi with 244 800 and SABC2 with 134 400.

The Movie Zone Cinema, opened in 2010, is the only cinema venue in Swaziland. This multiplex with four screens, each of which seats 100 patrons, is located within the Gables Shopping Centre at Ewulzini Valley.

Theatrical screenings of documentaries have not yet started and will probably not be popular as most people watch short documentaries on YouTube or on other internet based platforms. Many would more likely prefer to use their money to purchase mobile phones than pay for cinema tickets.

The most popular places where films are seen are show rooms in townships. But film and video clubs are not likely to work for screening documentaries as most people in Swaziland “are more concerned with day to day survival; like studying hard to go to university, studying hard to get a good job or concerned more about raising their families”. As a participant says, “even taking time to travel to a film or video club meeting would be a distraction for most people as they generally don’t extend themselves beyond what they are used to (radio, gospel music, etc.).” Anyone who would have time or interest in extending their interest in film or video clubs would be more easily accessible through Facebook.

Educational and non-profit distributors

There are none.

However, NGOs want to use video to promote their development and advocacy work. In Swaziland, each traditional authority has a community centre that could host video screenings. Meanwhile, the country’s national AIDS co-ordinating body has built additional youth and community centres which it wants to equip with televisions and VCRs and needs audio-visual materials to screen.

Some NGOs are organising thematic screenings (e.g. Friends of the Earth Swaziland (Yonge Nawe).

Legal frameworks including any censorship issues

Beginning in 1966 as a radio broadcaster, the Swaziland Broadcasting and Information Service is the broadcast and print information provider within Swaziland. State owned, it oversees the running of and is responsible for, radio and TV broadcasting services, newspapers, magazines and other printed government publications. It also regulates the internet and other government information services as well as the accreditation of foreign news reporters and correspondents operating in Swaziland. SBIS operates as a government department under the Ministry of Public Service and Information.

The infamous King’s Decree of 1973 mandates the King to superintend the executive, legislature and judiciary. The Swaziland Broadcasting Information Service broadcasts nationally and is still in state control and does not allow those with dissenting views to be covered or appear either on radio or television. Commentators reported that it was common knowledge that Channel Swazi, a TV station run by Qhwa Mamba, has some connections with the Royal family and also influences policy position on Trans World Radio, a religious radio station. To date, according to commentators, the state continues to thwart initiatives by Lubombo community to set up their community broadcasting station.

High rates of regulation and censorship mean that there is a lack of analysis within the media of why the country is in the state that it is in. This is due in part to media ownership and control as well as who the advertisers are and the way they can control what is produced within the media with they power that they hold.

Censorship is something that’s more ingrained on a social and cultural level. Swazis generally are not used to cameras being used to document the lives of ordinary people. Historically, indeed, the population has only been aware of cameras used by the government to relay messages through news on the national TV or occasionally used by organisations like UNICEF, PSI and other NGOs to also relay some type of message. As a consequence, there is a type of internal censorship that Swazis have about either using cameras themselves or being filmed.

A policy, piloted by the Department of Arts and Culture, is being drafted. Its objective is to safeguard the production of documentaries.

The government is promising to introduce independent regulation in the broadcasting and telecommunications sector through the Swaziland Communications Regulatory Commission (CRC).

Swaziland is still in the hands of dozens of extreme laws such as the Official Secrets Acts 1963, which prohibited any access to the government-held information. Though the Constitution does not include any information about the freedom of information, it does state that under the protection of Freedom of Expression (Section 24) a person has “the right to receive ideas or information without any interference”. This Constitutional law is yet to be tested in court and practiced. There is a deep secrecy between the government and the public. The government does not disclose information and any acts that suggest the request for information are often rejected or get caught up in bureaucratic red tape.

Swaziland’s Constitution covers the protection of freedom of expression. But the extent of the protection is in question since Section 24 elaborates on limitations that could be used to cut short the freedom of expression. There are also several new and old laws that infringe upon the law of freedom of expression such as the new Suppression of Terrorism Act (STA) 2008, “All those who were vocal are quieter now because of the act”. The Act defines the support of terrorism so broadly that anyone could be prosecuted. Swazi Law and Custom establish enormous fear about practicing the freedom of expression.

Currently, any foreign production project needs to get permission from the Department of Arts and Culture and include the Independent Producers Association and the Ministry of Trade and Industry.

Audience cultivation strategies including publicity/ PR strategy

Since 2004, The Golden Lion Film Festival has been showcasing short films and videos from Europe, the Americas, Asia, Africa and elsewhere in the world. All genres of shorts subjects are presented.

The festival’s original purpose was to overcome the limitations of commercial film distribution in the region, which is largely restricted to mainstream blockbuster films, and to introduce innovative filmmakers to a new audience by marketing through the local newspapers, radio, TV, banners and flyers and has also recommended doing live interviews through the radio and TV.

Revenue strategies, including advertising, sponsorship, footage licensing, partnerships with news organisations

None

The industry is underdeveloped and not supported in Swaziland. Those that practice film production do it part time, as a passion.

The total lack of commissions and support from the national broadcaster have forced the industry to make a living mainly from work commissioned by NGOs, as well as take on some corporate work to assist in meeting their financial commitments. There are, however, efforts from the broadcaster to start engaging independent producers in developing policies that will pave the way for future working relationships. The biggest challenge is the lack of a budget to pay for or commission programmes.

It is really hard to get a buy-in from companies to fund any documentary unless, and only if, the production has been commissioned. Many companies channel their funds to activities or events related to sport.

Study of rights issues for distribution both broadcast and online

Online rights across ‘territories’ for distribution both broadcast and online would not really affect Swaziland as internet is only blocked when there are political demonstrations. On a day to day basis nobody really cares if anybody is watching documentaries on DStv, cable channels like M-Net or SABC, or online on YouTube or other internet based platforms.

Options and best practices for dealing with piracy

According to some participants, the government works hard to curb piracy even though their efforts are mostly related to fighting pirated DVDs and music being sold on the street. They also work very hard to discourage people from buying pirated products. The Swazi people generally do not to buy pirated music and video products. Many people that sell pirated products in Swaziland are foreigners and they are regularly arrested.

The best way to fight piracy is to push the Copyrights Bill to be enacted to Law because currently the law is outdated and needs amendments.

Another way can be to motivate the street vendors of pirated goods to become distributors of documentary DVDs.

Possible creation of online film library and/or channel to distribute films supported by ADFF and others

That is a very good idea. It can help documentaries produced in Swaziland to develop by putting them on the map.

However, it is important to note that internet access in Swaziland is still slow and expensive. A study reveals that to date 28.5% of persons 10+ years have had/ have access to the internet. A lot of people do not necessarily access the internet in their home area but access it in key towns, cities and institutions such as schools (colleges and university) and the work place.

Young people are much less apprehensive about getting on board with the new media. It is generally a “male thing” although there is a growing army of female web surfers especially between the ages of 15 – 24 years.

The highest number of internet users access it at cafés (12.2% of the population), followed by those who access it at work 8.8% and at schools (high schools, university and colleges and other tertiary institutions), at home 2.8% and other places 2.5%.

While the internet is having an impact in Swaziland, it is perceived as two distinct media: a communications channel (mostly e-mails), and an information channel (websites and portals). Relatively few people make use of music and other download capabilities, nor use the web for shopping or trading.

Social movements, civil society groups and other partners

Swaziland’s media is greatly affected by economic, political and health-related factors. Its landlocked location in the south-east of Africa, makes farming Swaziland’s most prominent source of income for its population of 1,067,773 people.

Swaziland has a widespread HIV Aids epidemic status with 26.1% of adults being infected, and over 50% of the people in their 20’s carrying the disease. This threatens their livelihood and longevity and imposes vast economic challenges.

These are the factors which contribute to Swaziland having the lowest life expectancy in the world of approximately 32 years.

Swaziland’s need for international assistance to aid its economic and health-related issues is hindered by a continuum of largely hidden political problems which do not allow them to be a centre point on the international map.

Swaziland has a vibrant and diverse civil society with a number of NGOs, trade unions, faith groups and political parties attempting to operate in extremely difficult circumstances. Those

organisations working towards democracy in their country are frequently victimised and persecuted. This has lead to both divisions with the civil society movement as well as united efforts to change the future of Swaziland.

The Swazi state, in its desperate bid to keep a firm grip on power, has attempted to close off almost all civic space. Vocal citizens, human rights defenders, unionists and members of political parties are targeted by the State.

In order to effectively address these challenges, the country needs pressure by foreign donors, as well as civil society-led efforts to increase public participation in the country’s decision-making processes.

There are many NGOs (dealing mostly with issues on gender, HIV/AIDS, etc.) and UN agencies operating in Swaziland. However none have activities specifically related to documentary production.

Some key local organisations:

• Swaziland Positive living (SWAPOL) was founded in 2001 by five HIV positive women after experiencing stigma and discrimination from their in-laws, families and community members. SWAPOL’s core business is to provide support to improve the quality of life for people living with HIV/AIDS, affected families and orphans and vulnerable
• The Children of Swaziland a UK charity whose aims are to provide support to the women and children in Swaziland who are infected and affected by HIV/AIDS through funding education and health
• The Swaziland Federation of Trade Unions (SFTU) and the Swaziland Federation of Labour (SFL).
• The National Constitutional Assembly (NCA), created in 2003, is a coalition body of wide ranging civil society organisations, including the Catholic Church coalition group, the Community for Justice and Peace; the Swaziland Federation of Trade Unions (SFTU); the Swaziland Federation of Labour (SFL); the Swaziland National Association of Teachers (SNAT); Ngwane National Liberatory Congress (NNLC); People’s United Democratic Movement (PUDEMO) and a variety of NGOs and small groups and
• The United Front is a recently formed political movement which is aiming to bring together different sectors of civil society through their collective struggle for The group has been formed as further commitments of both union federations to take on the Swazi government and kingdom politically.

Political sensitivities the Fund needs to be aware of

The Kingdom of Swaziland under the leadership of King Mswati III is Africa’s last absolute monarchy. The King is responsible for choosing a prime minister and a number of representatives for the chambers of government. In a struggle to have a strong democratic movement within the country, the media subsequently suffers. Most journalists lack the ability to exercise media ethics and the rights associated with a free press due to the strict control by the state.

In 2011, Swaziland was rated “Not Free” in Freedom in the world, and “Not Free” in Freedom of the Press 2011. King Mswati III has currently full authority over the cabinet, Parliament and the judiciary. Freedom House commented that “The government routinely warns against negative news coverage, and journalists are subject to harassment and assault by both state and non state actors”. Reporters Without Borders conducted a “World Press Freedom Index 2011-2012”, showing that Swaziland ranked 144 out of 179 countries.

The same situation is evident in regards to Internet Freedom. Although there is only a small fraction of the population who have access to the internet, social networking has been used as a tool of protest in the past. The King has proposed a law whereby it is illegal to criticise King Mswati III on Facebook and Twitter. Justice Minister Mgwagwa Gamedze proposed the legislation and stated that they would take a “tough” stance on those who criticise the King via social media in order to “set an example”.

Protection for journalists in Swaziland is not in place. Journalists are often subject to anonymous telephone calls advising them not to publish particular stories and they have been called to the offices of the King, Prime Minister, and Senate subcommittee. Journalists continue to be threatened, harassed, and assaulted as a means of stopping them from criticising the government and the monarchy. For example, on January 12, 2008, former Cabinet Minister and Times of Swaziland columnist, Mfomfo Nkambule, publicly apologised to the King for a series of articles that criticised the monarchy after being pressured by police and government authorities. Prime Minister Sibusiso Dlamini had threatened to charge Mfomfo Nkambule and other media commentators under the 2008 Suppression of Terrorism Act. On April 27, the Times of Swaziland stopped publishing Nkambule’s articles.

Press freedom has become a very important political issue in Swaziland. Government restrictions and perceived patronising with regard to the media have obviously not gone down well with some sections of society. In general, the government appears reluctant to hasten the process of democratization both in the area of communication and the general area of governance, thus creating problems for itself.

This calls for a very serious reconsideration of policy issues by government.