BY MBONGENI NDLELA
LOBAMBA – The call by Mbabane East Member of Parliament, Welcome Dlamini, to suspend scholarships for students who criticize Eswatini while benefiting from government funding has sparked a necessary debate on loyalty, responsibility, and the ethics of state sponsorship.
Speaking during the Ministry of Labour and Social Security’s budget debate in the House of Assembly on 4 March, 2025, Dlamini argued that it is contradictory for students to accept government scholarships while openly supporting proscribed political parties and criticizing the Kingdom.
His remarks stemmed from recent incidents where Swazi students abroad were seen donning regalia of banned political organizations and making disparaging comments about Eswatini.
“I recently saw some Swazi students in our local papers dressed in t-shirts for proscribed political parties and were speaking ill about the Kingdom of Eswatini, yet the government pays their scholarships,” Dlamini remarked.
His concerns highlight a fundamental issue: should public funds be used to support individuals who undermine the very institutions providing for their education?
Proponents of Dlamini’s stance argue that scholarships are not just financial aids but investments made by the state to develop future leaders who will contribute positively to the nation’s growth. By accepting these funds, students have a moral obligation to uphold a degree of loyalty to the country that invests in their future. It is neither unjust nor unreasonable, they argue, to expect recipients of public funds to refrain from actions that might destabilize the very society that nurtures them.
Furthermore, Dlamini applauded the country’s authorities’ initiative to engage Eswatini students abroad during external trips. He believes these interactions foster a sense of belonging and counteract the influence of political movements attempting to turn students against their homeland. “That instills a sense of belonging to the students and counters the strategy of those who are working hard to recruit the students to turn against government, which is sponsoring them,” he stated, urging the Minister of Labour and Social Security to review scholarships for students proven to be anti-government.
On the other hand, critics may argue that free expression, including criticism of government policies, is a cornerstone of any progressive society. Silencing dissenting voices by withdrawing scholarships could potentially stifle constructive dialogue necessary for national development. The challenge, therefore, lies in balancing the right to free expression with the expectations tied to receiving state sponsorship.
This debate compels us to reflect on a broader question: How do we ensure that state-sponsored education leads to nation-building rather than nurturing adversarial attitudes towards the country? Perhaps the solution lies in deeper engagements with students, reinforcing national pride while also addressing the genuine concerns they might raise about governance.
In the end, the call by MP Welcome Dlamini is not just about scholarships—it is a call for a conversation on patriotism, responsibility, and the kind of leaders Eswatini wishes to cultivate for the future.
