Magufulification: Concept That Will Define Africa's Future and the Man Who Makes Things Happen

Magufulification: Concept That Will Define Africa's Future and the Man Who Makes Things Happen

Saturday, 31 October 2020


Welcome Joe Biden and Bye Donald Trump. Four years ago, Americans must have regretted their naivety of electing an ignorant guy to lead them and turn their White house into his personal estate. He promised to dry the pond in Washington to end up filling it with his kids, economic dingos and lobos not to mention courtiers and profiteers of all types. America lost every credit it once had internationally. He promised to make America Great Again (MAGA) to end up making America gleet awkwardly. Now that the time of infamy may soon come to an end, it is time for Americans to avoid repeating the mistakes. Once bitten, twice shy the saying goes. Will Americans repeat the mistakes they made? Who knows. Again, the leaders we elect normally look like us. Go Trump go and come Biden come
Never look back Trump go go never come back.


Thursday, 29 October 2020


Yesterday,  Wednesday  28th  October,  2020;  was   general  election  day  in  Tanzania.   It  was  our  “day  of  reckoning”,  the  day  when  our  specified  mission  was  accomplished;  and  our  specified  objective  was  duly  achieved.  I  personally  went    quite  early   to  cast  my  vote  at  Shule  ya  Msingi   Oysterbay  “B”  polling  station  in  Kinondoni  District,  Dar  es  Salaam,  where  I  was  registered  as  a  voter.   And   I  have  good  reason   to  believe   that,   when  the  scheduled   time  arrived   for   closing  the  polling  stations  at  the  end  of  that  exercise,  the  relevant  stakeholders   (particularly  the  election  managers  and  the  thousands  of   election  administrators  who  were  manning  the  numerous   polling  stations  throughout  our  vast  country),  must  have  breathed  a  great  sigh  of  relief,   as   they  packed  up  their  election  equipment   in  order  to  go  and  hand  over  their  completed  assignments   to  their  respective  Returning  officers.                                         
         And,  I  presume,   it  must  have  been  the  same  for   the  very  many  people   who  actively  participated  directly  in  this  process,  either    as  aspiring   candidates  for  the  various  elective  positions  and  their  supporters,    or  as  campaign  personnel  who  travelled  around  with  the  aspiring  candidates;  spending   every  day  of  the  last  two  months   literary  on  their  feet,   busy  asking  for  votes  from  all  and  sundry.  They   too,  must  have  heaved    deeply   at  the  thought  that  it  was  now  over  at  last,   all  done  and  completed.
Mission  accomplished,  and  objective  achieved.
        That was  the  big   ‘mission’   which  we  have  just  successfully  accomplished;  namely   the  2020  general  election   exercise.   The word  “election”  generally   means  ‘the  process  of choosing  a  person,  or  group  of  persons,   to  fill  any  vacant  position,  or  positions’.    But  in  the  context  of  this  article   it  means  one  thing  only,  which  is   that  mammoth   countrywide   exercise    of  choosing  the  political  leaders  in  the  Government   and  the  Representatives  of  the  people  in  Parliament,  as  well  as  in  the  Local  Authority  Councils;   who   will  guide  the  affairs  of  our  nation  for  the  coming  five  years.     That  is  precisely  the  “mission”   that  was   accomplished  yesterday.                                                                       
         And    the  “objective”  which  was   achieved,   is  the  selection  that  was  made   in  the  course  of  that  voting  activity,   of   the   leaders  who  will  man  the  various   Institutions  of  the  Government,   and  of   the   Parliament,  plus  the  Local  Authorities,  for  the  coming    five  years.
 “Elections  have  consequences”,  
        In  last  week’s  article,   we  referred  to  certain  mild  warnings   about   the  possibility  of  voters   ‘making  mistakes’   in  elections;     and  to  the  attendant  adverse  consequences  of  making  such  mistakes.    We  referred  specifically   to   the  specific   ‘mistake’   of   the  voters   ‘electing   what  is  known  as    a  “hung  Parliament”;   that  is  to  say,  a  Parliament  in  which  the  President’s  political  party  (in  our case  CCM),   does  not  have  a  majority  of  the  MPs.                     
However,  we  wish  to  clarify  that   in  reality,  we  were  actually  citing   only  a  remote   and  purely    theoretical  example.   For   I  am  pretty  sure  that   in  our  case,  such  ‘mistake’   WILL  NOT   happen  at  all   as  a  result  of  yesterday’s  voting  exercise.                                                                                                                                                                                   It   simply  cannot  happen   because,   even  by  just  considering  the  unprecedented  huge  crowds  of  people  who  attended  President  Magufuli’s  campaign  rallies  everywhere  he  went  across  the  Regions  and  Districts  of  Tanzania;   and  also  by   looking  at  the  media  reports  that  were  being  circulated   in  the  course  of  yesterday    from  diverse  sources  in  different  parts  of  the  country,   regarding   the  massive  turn  out  of  the   people  at  practically  every  polling  station  throughout  the  country,    and  all  of  them  displaying   vivid   enthusiasm,  eagerness,   and  determination    to  cast  their  votes   quickly   and  call  it  a  day;   even  on  that  evidence  alone,   one  can  reasonably  predict   that  the  voters   will  have  made  no  such   ‘mistake’;    and   that  instead,  they   must   have   decided   to  give  a  resounding  victory  to  President  John   Magufuli ,  together  with   his  ruling  party (CCM). In   other   words,   the   results   will   clearly   show   that   the   people   have   not   only    spoken,   but   have  spoken   very  clearly  and  loudly.                                                                                      
         Thus,  there  is  no  doubt  whatsoever,  that  President  John  Pombe  Magufuli   will,  on  the  appointed  day,   have  the  pleasure  of  opening  the  12th  Parliament  of  the  United  Republic  of  Tanzania  which    has   a   ‘super-comfortable’  majority  of  more  than   two-thirds  of  the  MPS   being  members  of  Chama  cha  Mapinguzi.
We   should  therefore   just  relax,   and  wait  for  the  promised  “land  of  milk  and  honey”  which,  according  to  President  Magufuli’s  own  campaign  promises,  will   be  the  product  of  his  second- term   of   his  already   demonstrated    extraordinary  ‘miracle’  Administration. 
We  are   back  to  our  usual  routine.
        And  now,  with  the  election  process  safely   out  of  the  way,  that   allows   Tanzanians   to  go  back , each  one  of  us,  to  his  or  her  normal  routine,  whatever  it  may  be;   and  just   wait  for  the  announcement  of  the  election  results  by  the  National  Electoral  Commission.                                                                          
        But   as  for  me,    ha -ha - ha:   I  am  just  happily   waiting  to  join  in  the   inevitable   carnival-style  CCM   victory   celebrations  which  will  follow  the  announcement  of  the  results;   as  well  as  my   inevitable  invitation,  as  former  CCM  national  Vice  Chairman  as  well  as  former  National  Assembly   Speaker,   to  attend  the  official  inauguration  of  President  John   Pombe  Magufuli   for  his   richly  deserved   second  and  final  term  in  office.      Mungu  ibariki  Tanzania.  
This  confidence  in   the  results  is  based  on   the  very  powerful  and  persuasive  campaign  that  was  so  vigorously  conducted  by   President  Magufuli   in  his  capacity  as  Chairman  of  Chama  cha  Mapinduzi    under  the   attractive   slogan   of  “chagua  mafiga  matatu” ;  plus  the  huge  ‘ value  added’  advantage  of   his  ‘miracle’   performance  in  managing  the  affairs  of  the  nation,   during  his  just-ended  first  term  in  office .  These    must   surely   have   given  CCM    a  ‘tempest  style’   election  victory.  (Ushindi  wa  kishindo).
         In  my   accumulated   experience,  this  was  not  a  normal  “general  election”.   It  was,  in  reality,  more  of  a  “referendum”  on  President   Magufuli’s   excellent  performance  during  his  first  term  in  office.    The   end   of   this    series  captioned   ‘Towards  the  General  Election)’. 
         In  my  article  of  13th  August,  2020,  (in  which  I  paid  special  tribute  to  the  late  former  President  Benjamin  Mkapa  of  the  third-phase  Government  of  the  United  Republic),   I  also  disclosed  that  it  was   this   late   former  President  Mkapa,   who  had  asked  me,  when  we  last met  in  Dodoma  on  12th July,  2020,  to  write  this   special  series  of   articles;   which,  he  suggested,   should  be  specially  designed  “for  the  purpose  of  raising  public  awareness   on   the  different   aspects  of  the  general  subject  of   general  elections,   as  a  warm-up  to  this  year’s  general  election” .                                                                                                                                                     The  late  Benjamin  Mkapa  was  himself  an  avid  reader  of  my  weekly  articles  in  this  column.    I  therefore   immediately   accepted  this   challenge;    and,  starting   with    that  article  of  13th  August,  2020;   all   my  weekly  articles  thereafter    have  been  on  this  single  subject,  penned  under  the  appropriate  title  of   “TOWARDS  THE  2020  GENERAL  ELECTION”.                                    
        But   now   that  the  general  election  exercise  is  safely   over;    we  will  revert  to  other  current  topics,   and  discuss  them   as  when  they  occur,  in  the  same   way   we  have  always  done. 
         However,  because  the  month  of  October   is  our  dedicated   month   for  paying  homage  to  the  late  Mwalimu   Nyerere,   I  believe  it  will  be  proper  and   befitting,    to   conclude  this   particular  series  of  election- related    articles,    with   a  piece  on    Nyerere’s  strong   views   on   the  matter   of  ‘ private  candidates’  prohibition  from   participating  in   our  national   elections.                                
        In  this  context,  “private  candidate”  means   “an  election  candidate  who  is  not   sponsored  for  election   by  any   fully  registered  political  party”.   This  is  a  legal  prohibition,  and   is  provided  for,      in  the  case   of  Presidential  elections,   in   article  39(1) ( c)  of  the  country’s  Constitution;  and  in  art.  67(1) (c )  in   respect  of  Parliamentary  election  candidates.   And  for  Local  Authority  election candidates,   similar  prohibition  is  provided  for  in  the  Local   Authorities  Election  laws.                                                                                                                        
        These   prohibitions   were   imposed   by   the  ‘one-party’   Constitution  of  1965.   The  primary  reason  for  it   was  given  as  “to  enable  the  party  to  exercise  control  over  the  quality  of  its  candidates,  specifically   their  integrity  and  ethics.
         In   the  special  circumstances  of  that  time,   this  was  probably  right,  and   also  necessary;    because  there  was  no  other  established  authority,  or  organ,  which  could  undertake   such  tasks.  
Nyerere’s    stance   on   this  matter.
        But,  probably  unknown  to  many  people,   Mwalimu    Nyerere’s    mind   had,  upon  the  country’s  transition  to  multi-party  politics,  gone  through  a   crucial  fundamental   change.    He  had  genuinely  adopted   the  view,   that  this  prohibition   imposed   by  law   on  election  participation  by  ‘private  candidates’,   was  a  breach  of  an  important  human  right,  namely  the  citizen’s  right  to  vote  in  national  elections.     He  expressed  this  opinion   very   clearly  in  his  book  titled   “Our  Leadership  and  the  Destiny  of  Tanzania,   in  the  following  words :- “I  am  not  denying  that  the  right  of  everyone  to  stand  in  an  election  was  effectively  denied  during  the  one party  system.   But  I  argued  then,   and  I  continue  to  do  so  now,   that  with  two  candidates  being  submitted  to  the  free  choice  of  the  voters   (the  system  that  was  in  operation  at  the  time),   that  was  the  most  democratic  system  under  the  circumstances  of  that  time.              
        But  after  moving  to  the  multi-party  system,  a  move  which  I  fully  supported,  we  were  effectively  saying  that  the  circumstances  have  changed.  Therefore  this  restriction  on  the  exercise  of  one  of  the  basic  fundamental  peoples’   rights  could  be  lifted  without  endangering  the  unity  and  peace  of  our  country”.  
        He  returned  to  this  subject  at  a  public  rally in  Mbeya  on  May  Day,  1995,  to  which  he  had  been  invited  as   the  ‘guest  of  honour’.   In  his  keynote  address,  among  many  other  things,  Mwalimu  Nyerere  said  the  following:- “ Ninalo  tatizo  moja  ambalo  nataka  kulisema  hapa,  kwa  sababu  ninaliona  kuwa  jambo  la  msingi  sana.  Mini  nadhani  sheria  zetu  zimekosea   sana  kwa  kuzuia  wagombea  binafsi   kushiriki   katika  uchaguzi.  Hili  ni  jambo  la  msingi   kwa  sababu   linamnyima   mtu   haki  yake   ya  kuomba  kupigiwa  kura.    Hiyo  ni  haki  yake  ya  ki-raia,  ambayo  huwezi  kumyima”.   
        Nevertheless,   despite  this  crusade  by  Mwaimu  Nyerere  for  the  rights  of  the  ‘private  candidate’  to  participate  in  national  elections,  the  said  prohibitions  have  not  yet  been  lifted.                                      
        It  should,  however,   be  noted    that   the  proposed  new  Constitution  of  the  United  Republic  of  Tanzania   has  taken  care  of  this  matter  in  its  article  88(1)(f);  which  allows   the  participation  of  ‘private  candidate’  in  the  Presidential  elections;   and  in   its  article  140(1) (c ),  which    grants  similar  relief  to  candidates  seeking  relief  to  Parliament.    But  President  Magufuli   has  clearly  stated    that   “he   is  not  in  any  hurry”   to  complete  the  remaining  (referendum)  stage  of  this   Constitution-making  process ,  for  the  cogent  reasons  which   he  himself  has  publicly  explained,  namely   that  he  is  giving  first  priority  to  other,  more  important   infrastructure   development  projects  (which  we  all  have  indeed  witnessed,  and   fully appreciated).                                                                      
        This  is  completely   in  line  with  the  late  Mwalimu  Nyerere’s  philosophy  of  “kupanga  ni  kuchagua”.   Which  means  that   proper  planning  involves  the  making  of  proper  choices   between  competing  priorities.                         
        Thus,   considering  the  fact   that    we  have,  as  a  nation,   solemnly   pledged  to  maintain and  implement   Mwalimu  Nyerere’s   legacy;   and   his   philosophy   of  “kupanga  ni  kuchagua”,  being   one  of  his   most  significant   legacy  components;   it  must  therefore  be  duly  maintained,   and  implemented,    wherever  and  whenever   possible. And   that  is  what  President  Magufuli   is  precisely doing.   /  0754767576.
Source: Daily News and Cde Msekwa.

Wednesday, 28 October 2020


Muddy waters make catching fish easy; Chinese proverb has it. Every cloud has a silver lining. However, not in every muddy water catching fish are easy as ABC.  Nonetheless, for president John Pombe Magufuli (JPM), this has become the case. He became president when Tanzania was in the bog of sleaze, drug peddling, pilfering and had a poorly performing economy among many ills the country faced then. Now, this is history.  For after Magufuli took over, everything changed dramatically and quickly so to speak. 
        That said, currently Tanzania lapsed its general elections yesterday. This was yet another test for Magufuli who’s successfully won many accoladed for turning Tanzania economy around within a very foreseeable time. we don’t want to call this a marvel though it looks like for those who know how things work in the upper echelons of power.  Magufuli’s superbly top notch and gallant services to his country can’t be gainsaid or pushed under the rag. Whoever tries disparaging and underrating such efforts must automatically either be ignorant of the truth or just a Janus-faced fella, which is normal in politics, especially the politics of sewage as the late Samuel Sitta, former speaker of the parliament would agreeably put it. As well, such a person will do so for his or her peril in the first place. I am not a government spokesperson not even next to him or her. Surely, what I can comfortably say’s that whoever faults Magufuli for his economic achievements under whatever decoy, must be doing a self-disservice and committing suttee to her/himself and to his or her ambition of unseating the man. The long and short of this is that fair and square the majority of Tanzanians have been awed by his performance.
The sage has it that it is better to arrive late in this world than early in the next one. Politically, though running against Magufuli is their democratic right, it is next to never to unseat him. And it is not any more possible so to speak. If anything, for the candidates I see today, what they’re trying to attain is nothing but arriving early in the next political world. When it comes to winning elections by defeating Magufuli, the opposition needs something credible and concrete to firm up their assertions, if any, by conducting more research in order to show what they all are about that all citizens can support. By so doing, hopefully, the message will unequivocally hit home. Again, is there anything convincing that one can pick against Magufuli’s extraordinaire performance really? If anything, the opposition has a lot of jerky road to cover to convince any sane bin-Adam to desert Magufuli for it. Beating Magufuli, for the opposition, is as good as an elephant to pass through needle’s eye. Forget about the biblical Carmel. There’s more to this than meets the eye so to speak. Or put it this way. For the opposition to beat Magufuli in this ballot, only extraordinaire miracles must happen. Again, beating Magufuli is rare and next to never like dreaming to find an aye-aye in the desert or Greenland.
Apart from the miracles that can’t happen to max out their achievement, the opposition, by having three candidates, namely Bernard Membe-ACT-Wazalendo, Ibrahim Lipumba-CUF, Tundu Lissu-CHADEMA and others who are pondering on joining the craze and maze, the Chama Cha Mapinduzi (CCM) can assuredly take this to bank. It has already won even before casting the ballot without any hassles. If they by any stretch of imagination mean business, they’d have replicated and resuscitated and salvage the UKAWA, that, as well, didn’t move Magufuli despite being a rookie when he first contended for the presidency, he won in 2015. This is easy and simple to gauge and grasp. The opposition will share the ballots among themselves; and thus, thrust the CCM to victory just as easily and simple as that not to mention that their competitor is in the league of his own in every aspect.
        I heard some people cajoling Magufuli for constructing bridges, flyover, roads, ships and purchasing planes saying that such are things but not humans as if they’re constructed for themselves not humans. Go figure. Similarly, his cynics deride Magufuli for purchasing the planes they’re now using to crisscross the country easily to tell their fibs and fabrications. More importantly, they’re jeering his Hapa Kazi mantra saying that, when we gained our independence, the Father of the Nation, Mwl JK Nyerere had the chant of Uhuru na Maendeleo namely freedom and Development but not Hapa Kazi they’re now misconstruing as the tool of enslaving Tanzanians! Startlingly, such people are calling themselves Christians whose book of authority says that “if a man will not work, he shall not eat (2 Thessalonians 3:10). Why don’t they agree that Magufuli can ably handle whatever it thrown at him currently? Will they rout him?  Should we rob Peter to pay Paul? Time will surely tell.

Tuesday, 27 October 2020

Libya Almost a Decade After Gaddafi

It is close to a decade since Libya became what it is today; its own shell after the fall of the regime led by its longtime dictator, Muamar Gaddafi who’s toppled and summarily killed as the world watched in disbelief––and for sum with glee. In this biagulated piece, we’re looking at post-Gaddafi Libya as it bleeds to death as it spins and spirals to a failed country status.  When another dictator in neighboring Egypt, Hosni Mubarak’s pulled down, Gaddafi’s quoted as saying that Libya’s different from Libya. In truth, the west, through its Libyan nodes, duped Libyans and used them to destroy their country and kill their dictator. Gaddafi’s deposing and thereafter arresting and summary killing, for many Libyans who were tired of his rule were over the moon wrongly thinking this would usher in democracy they lacked for a long time. Pitifully and sadly, it didn’t happen though. Instead of bringing democracy and human rights to replace dictatorship thereof, ochlocracy and delinquency have taken over ever since. Libyans and other Africans under dictators were equally duped and frustrated to rethinking about toppling theirs. Surely, many have backburnered any attempts to topple their tinpot despots. The M7, Beer and others are jubilating now.  Indeed, Libya’s an idyllic country that throve economically and socially under Gaddafi it now misses and wishes it’d not have demised.  Libya’s even firmer politically than many democracies despite being ruled by a despot for over four decades.
        Furthermore, Libya’s all over the place, especially in Africa. Go to South Africa. You’ll hear a story of how Libya helped in the struggle against apartheid while the west’s in bed with the regime down there. When it comes to the rights of Africans, despite openly favoring to be referred to as an Arab who accidentally happened to be born in Africa, Gaddafi made sure that he contributed and supremely controlled the continent to his advantage despite pretending he’s meat in the sandwich, which he actually wasn’t. He provided scholarships to many African students in many countries. He donated mosques in some. He oft used to dine and wine African rulers whenever and wherever he snatched the opportunity. In all, before being booted out, Gaddafi succeeded to invite African rulers to Sirte, his hometown, to lecture them about how to become independent and prosperous based on wisely utilizing their resources. When he’s captured and butchered, news swirled that his African counterparts who used to benefit from his largesse abandoned him. We know. They didn’t have any muscle before their ex-masters, at least, they’d have shouted at those who were hunting him in order to kill him. Gaddafi tried to reconcile with his arapaima like enemies he mistook of friends in the west. But alea iacta est or the dice was cast. There’s no turning back. He’d to die. And, indeed, he died.
            At this point in time, Libya’s been bleeding to death since the bloody dictatorship under Muamar Gaddafi’s brought down after mass action supported and used by the west to topple their friend-turned foe. Many historians, journalists and social scientists have chronicled the brutal and shameful fall of Gaddafi from grace. The books of history and political science have or will be written on Gaddafi.  However, the sapience of doing so depends on many factors such as who’s writing, when and why. Despite chronicling the rise and fall of Gaddafi, sadly, much attention’s been placed on a person but not a nation.  It all depends on where one stands to look into Libya’s fateful history and  Gaddafi’s as well.  Much attention’s been placed on the dictator sadly but not on the nation. Gaddafi has eclipsed the nation. This is wrong. It needs to be righted to avoid its perpetuation and repetition as far as colonial sired African feeble states are concerned. To me, what matters is the death of Libya as is the case of Iraq compared to that of Saddam Hussein; Afghanistan compared to that of Mohammed Najibullah and Afghanistan who all, ironically died violently as opposed to those of Yugoslavia and Marshall Josip Broz Tito with the exception of that Adolf Hitler minus Germany. 
        We have brutally and blindly overcharged the tyrants without doing the same to the forces that cloned and nourished them. What academic and practical ignorance and self-deception! We have stupidity exonerated the movers and shakers in this international delinquency. This is but a collective sin. 
        This is what’s kept Africa languishing in conflict and misery.  How do you tackle the baboon by exonerating the elephant and resolve the problem? Who cares about asking such a logically thorny question? Who cares if the real culprits hide behind democracy human rights and what have you?
The west has destroyed the world.
    Colonialism globalism capitalism racism you name it. Who holds it accommodated for the sins it has perpetually perpetrated against the world full of the progenies of the lesser God? It's right to forget the tyrants but not the nation's however artificial and fake they are. Doing so is nothing but internalising and sanctioning the crime and the practice.  
        To avoid what befell Libya, west’s monomaniac kultur of destruction needs to be watched closely. For, Idi Amin former Uganda butchers as well without forgetting  Jean- Bedel Bokassa (CAR), Augusto Pinochet (Chile), Anastasia Somoza, Abdul Fattah al Sisi (Egypt) and many more are a few of those the west cloned and used to dislocate targeted countries either to exploit their resources or maintain their strategic positions. 
        If you uproot the roots, the shoots will die but if you uproot the shoots and spare the roots they’ll germinate.  To cure the scourge, we need to start with the root cause but not the its victims.
When the world faced the crime without name, as former Britain prime minister Winston Churchill once defined genocide, an academic, Raphael Lemkin (24 June 1900 – 28 August 1959) gave the world the term genocide. Lemkin coined the word genocide by combining two languages namely Greek and Latin from which he scooped two words namely genos (family, race or tribe) and -cedere namely killing. Ever since, the word has been entrenched in the international law. When Lemkin came up with this term, the world was reeling from the holocaust that the Nazi committed in Europe on Jews. Due to the sensitivity of the issue, there was a very urgent need of establishing national and international law to deal with this crime. Notably, the world by then was more of Europe and its allies. The rest were but a peripheric one whose importance was as good as none.
            That’s why some academics question the rationale of establishing the law a long time after the first genocides such as those in the DRC and Namibia were committed. Underscoring that those involved were not white people, there was no way one would have the urgency to formulate the law.
            Today’s this piece seeks to introduce another crime that’s slowly being committed by the high and the mighty over the children of the lesser God. This is none other than what I call
 Centum ide or statoscope or the killing of the nation or state as neologism, which, up until now, has actually already occurred in Afghanistan, Iraq and Libya. How far will this fare? All depends on how the preys will act.
            Although the Centumide or Statumcide isn’t expressly called so by those committed it as was genocide before Lemkin coined it, it has the name. It is arrogantly and wrongly called regime change. If we ask ourselves, was what transpired in Libya a regime change? A regime change would remove one regime and replace it with another. Looking at what transpired in Libya and other two mentioned country, it is unreasonable to claim that it was regime change. If anything, it was nation or state destruction hence, Centumide and statumicide.
            In sum, systematically, the west has always created the propitious environment for destroying and exploiting countries with resources that it doesn’t have monomaniac freebooting access to. To do so, it destabilises them under many pretexts. It can use democracy or  selective human rights that it doesn’t give to others who aren’t  like it or its friends or feeds. This is the story of the demise of Gaddafi and Libya that African countries need to be cagey of. Being the victims of western machinations, every African country needs to learn from the fall of Libya instead of putting more emphasis on Gaddafi’s. As Publius Terentius Afer (The African), Roman Poet, puts it “Hom sum, humani nihil a me alienum puto” literary I am a human; I consider nothing that is human alien to me–––what befell Libya can befall any country. For, nits make lice. The saying goes.
Source: African Executive Magazine today.

Saturday, 24 October 2020


Wiki mbili zilizopita, safu hii iliangazia namna wapiga kura watakavyochagua kwa kuzingatia baadhi ya mambo. Wiki hii tunawaangazia  wachaguliwa tukigusia udhaifu na ubora wa baadhi ya maamuzi yao. Hapa tutaangalia procedure zaidi ya sera.  Pamoja na ugumu na umuhimu  wake, uchaguzi wa mwaka huu ni rahisi kutabiri ni mambo gani yatakuwa turufu kimkakati kuliko chaguzi nyingine zilizopita. Leo, tutaangalia kwanini ni rahisi kunusa hali hali itakuwaje na sababu za kufanya hivyo. Pamoja na ukweli kuwa kushinda na kushindwa ni matukio tegemewa na ya kawaida, nani atashinda  au kushindwa siyo. Kufikia hitimisho wakati wa kuelekea kwenye kilele cha zoezi hili adhimu huhitaji ujuzi wa kuangalia viashiria wezeshi. Kwa kuzingatia sayansi hii, safu hii, leo, itaonyesha vitu vitakavyoamua ushindi. Mshindi atakuwa mmoja na watakoshindwa ni wengi. Hili halina utata. Kwa kuzingatia ukweli huu, zifuatazo ni sababu zinazonishawishi kusema bila hofu wala woga kuwa  vifuatavyo ni vigezo ambayo wagombea wanapaswa kuvinagalia kwa makini ili kushinda. Ieleweke kuwa hatulengi kupendelea au kuonea chama au kambi yoyote.
Yafuatayo ni matokeo ya sayansi ya uchambuzi wa masuala ya kijamii na kisiasa inayoweza kufanywa na yeyote mwenye utalaamu katika fani hii. Leo tutatoa faida zaidi kwa upinzani si kwa vile tuna ugomvi na wapinzani wao. La hasha. Ni kwa vile tuna marejeo ya chaguzi mbali mbali zilizopita nchini nje ya nchi.
        Mosi, bila upinzani kuungana na kuja na mgombea mmoja, kuna uwezekano hili likauathiri vibaya fursa ambayo washindani wao hawataichezea.  Hii ni kutokana ukweli kuwa umoja ni nguvu na utegano ni udhaifu. Hii halina mjadala. Hivyo, upinzani ungeliangalia hili kwa makini na kulishughulikia kabla ya siku ya kupiga kura. Siku zote, vita ya panzi ni neema ya kunguru. Kuwa na nguvu ya pamoja hakuna mjadala. Tofauti na uchaguzi wa mwaka 2015–––ambapo upinzani wenye ulisimamisha mgombea mmoja chini ya Umoja wa Katiba ya Wananchi (UKAWA)–––kipindi hiki, vyama vyenye ushawishi vimekuja kila mmoja na mgombea wa vyake. Huu ni udhaifu mkubwa ambao ni mtaji mkubwa kwa wapinzani wake. Ukiwa na washidani waliogawanyika, unashinda kirahisi. Hili halina ubishi hata kidogo.  Kwanini upinzani hautaki kuona hatari ya utengano huu. Kama kila mtu angesimamisha mtu wake mwaka 2015, Edward Lowassa, mgombea wa UKAWA–––asingeweza kufanya vizuri kama alivyofanya tena ndani ya muda mfupi–––aliweza kupata zaidi ya asilimia 40 tokana na muungano wa upinzani ambao kwa sasa haupo. Je hili nalo upinzani utamlaumu nani? Kwanini wana mikakati wa upinzani wameshindwa kuona jambo rahisi kama hili?  Kama upinzani utaungana, utawapa wapinzani wao kibarua cha ziada cha kupambana na hoja za pamoja badala ya sasa ambapo hata hoja zao zikipuuzwa hakuna madhara yatakayoonekana wazi wazi.
        Pili, upinzani kwa sasa una kazi ngumu kuibua sera mbadala za pamoja zingetosha kujibu zile za wapinzani wao. Hili nalo linahitaji umoja. Tutatoa mfano mmoja wa Afrika na dunia. Nchi nyingi za magharibi zimekuwa zikinyonya nchi za kiafrika kwa kufanya biashara na nchi moja moja badala ya pamoja. Zinatumia ukosefu wa umoja wa Afrika kuendelea kuinyonya.
        Tatu, ukiachia mbali ukosefu wa umoja, upinzani una kikwazo kingine kikubwa yaani kuosefu wa uzoefu ikilinganishwa na ule wapinzani wao ambao watatumia uzoefu wao kuwahenyesha kirahisi  kwa kupiga pale walipogawanyika pale utegano wao utakaposababisha waanze kugombea kushinda kura kwenye majimbo mbali mbali ambapo wangeweka mgombea mmoja wa upinzani. Kimsingi, hata kama upinzani siku zote umekuwa dhaifu, huu mgawanyiko utaudhoofisha zaidi kiasi cha kutofua dafu mbele  ya adui aliyeshikamana kuliko wakati wowote wa maisha yake ya miaka ya karibuni.
         Nne mbali na sababu tajwa hapo juu, kutokuungana kwa wapinzani hata kwa ajili ya uchaguzi tu, kunatoa nafasi kwa washindani wao kuwapa hali ngumu tokana na kuwa na mtandao mkubwa na mpana nchi nzima, ambao wapinzani hawana kama hawataungana. Hii ni mbali na kuwa na wanachama na wapiga kura wengi. Kuwa na matandao mkubwa ni jambo moja na kuufikia ni jambo jingine ukiachia mbali kuutumia. Wapinzani wangeungana na kugawana majimbo, nina hakika wangeweza kuwa na mtandao mpana nchi nzima na kuweza kuepuka ughali wa kusimamisha kila chama mtu wake.
        Mwisho, fedha zina nafasi kubwa katika uchaguzi wowote hasa kuwawezesha wagombea kuwafikia walengwa. Kwa upinzani ulioungana, hata kama hauna fedha nyingi kama washindani wake, lau ungepunguza maumivu kifedha. Upinzani unapaswa kujua kuwa mambo yote yaliyotajwa juu ni muhimu kuweza kushinda kwani bila kuyaweka sawa, wanaweza kuwasaidia washindani wao kuwashinda kirahisi. Tumalizie kwa kuwakumbusha namna nchi ya jirani ya Kenya wapinzani walivyofanikiwa kuangusha chama cha KANU kilichokuwa madarakani tangu uhuru tena kwa muungano wa kustukiza. Nchini Zambia kadhalika. Mifano ni mingi. Leo inatosha. Tuonane wiki ijayo.
Chanzo: Nipashe Jumapili.

Friday, 23 October 2020


Je kweli hawa wana dhamira ya kweli kushinda uchaguzi? Maalim Seif ana jipya gani baada ya kujaribu mara nyingi akiishia kupigwa chini? Je huu ni mwanzo wa kile tulichotabiri kuwa wapinzani watashindwa kabla ya kuingia hata kwenye sanduku la kura? Mbona wanajisababishia kushindwa halafu walaumu?

Wednesday, 21 October 2020




In  the  context  of  this  article,  “day  of  reckoning”   means   the  28th  day  of  October,  2020;  when  the  voters  of  Tanzania,  in  their  millions,  are  expected   to   go  to  their  respective  polling  stations   to  cast  their  valuable  votes,  in  order  to  elect  their  President,  and  their  respective  members  of  Parliament  and  of  the  Local  Authority  council.   It   is  a  ‘day  of  reckoning’,   in  the  sense  that   it   will  be  the  time   when   individual  Tanzanians  will   make  their   decisions,    that   may  subsequently  be  judged  to   have  been   either   right  or  wrong;    plus,  should  it  happen  that  the  majority  will   collectively   have   made  the  wrong  decision,   then   they  could   subsequently   be  punished  for  that  wrong  decision.   This  is  due  to  the  fact  that,  as  has  been  revealed  in  this  column before,    “elections  have  their  consequences”.
“Elections  have  consequences”
The  statement  that  “elections  have  consequences”,   was  made  by  one  senior  American  Diplomat,  in  relation  to  Kenya’s   2013 general  election.   His  statement  was  intended  to   be  a  warning  to  the  voters  of  Kenya,  that  they  would  face  unpleasant  consequences  “if  they  made  the  mistake”  of  electing  Presidential  candidate  Uhuru   Keyatta,  and  his  running  mate  William  Ruto,  both  of  whom  had  been  arraigned  before  the   International  Court  of  Justice (ICC),   for  their  alleged  role  in  the  post-election  violence,   which  had  rocked  many  parts  of  Kenya   following  the  disputed  results  of  the  previous (2007)  general  election.                                                                                                     That  statement    was  premised  on  the  condition  that   the  voters  “will  make  a  mistake”.   Hence,   in  our  own  circumstances,   the   reasonable   presumption   should  be,    that  the  voters     will   not    make  any  mistakes  for,   thanks  to  our  very   extensive  ‘voter  education’   campaigns;    they  are  presumed  to   know   how  to  make  the  right  choices.                                                                                   However,  in  the  most  unlikely  event   that   the  voters   will  indeed,   perhaps   unwittingly,  collectively     “make  a   mistake”,   say,   for  example,  of  electing   a  ‘botched’  election,    then   yes;   such  election  can  produce  certain  undesirable   consequences,  including   dire  ones.    A   ‘botched  election’  would  be  that  which  produces   what   is  known  in  parliamentary  parlance   as  a  “hung  Parliament”;   i.e.  a  Parliament   in  which   the  Government  has  only    a  minority  of  MPs,  and  will have  therefore  be  severely  constrained  in  its  operations.   Fortunately,  thanks  to  our  voter  education  campaigns,   a   ‘hung   Parliament’   is  a  most  unlikely  occurrence   in  our  jurisdiction.       This  is  largely   because  our  voters  are  being   sufficiently   sensitized  to  the  concept  of   the  symbolic   “mafiga  matatu”  (the  three  cooking  stones);   where  the  voters  are  urged  to  vote  for  the  same-party   candidates  for  the  President,  Member  of  Parliament,  and  Member  of  the  Local  Authority  Council.   This  concept   is  what  avoids  the  possibility  of  a  “hung  Parliament”  being  elected.              
        But,   the  American  Diplomat  quoted  above  was  referring  to  an  entirely  different   event   which  occurred  in  Kenya,   not  really  as  a  result  of  “mistakes”   made  by  the  voters  of  Kenya,   but  was      the  result  of  certain   criminal  actions   deliberately  committed   by  the ‘ losers’   of  that   general  election,  who   just   refused  to  accept  its  results,  and  started  causing  big  trouble!
         Elections  can  indeed  have  adverse  consequences.
However,  even  in  those  circumstances  where  the  voters  have  committed  no  mistakes,    elections  may  still   have  adverse  consequences.    In  our  own  electoral  history,  we  have  had  some   adverse  ‘election  consequences’,   arising  from   cases  of  “election  boycotts”;   which  were   deliberately  organized  by   the  Civic  United  Front (CUF)  in  Zanzibar.     An    “election  boycott”  is  defined  as  “the  refusal  to  take  part  in  an  election,  as  a way  of  protesting,  or  showing  strong  disapproval,   against   it”.                                               
We  have  indeed,  in  the  past,   experienced  several   such  ‘election  boycotts’   taking  place  in  Zanzibar.   Thus,  although  at  the  present   moment,   there  is  no   possibility  of  such  danger,   that  the  forthcoming   2020  general  election  might  be  boycotted,   but  still,  purely    as  a  precaution,  the   point   of  this  presentation   is   to  issue  a   gentle   warning  to  the  stakeholders,   that   such  ‘election  boycotts’,   whenever   they   have  occurred  (on  the  usual  flimsy  excuse  that  the   elections  will  not  be  free  and  fair);  they  have  always  produced  their   own   adverse  consequences.                   They   should   therefore   be   carefully   avoided.   They   include  the  following  categories:-                                                                                          
 (i)  The  irresponsible  abandonment  of  a  legal   obligation.  
“Election  boycotts”  are  normally   organized  by  political parties  which  should,  or  ought,  to  have  participated  therein    And,   in   the  context  of  or  political  system,  political  parties  have  an  implied  obligation   to  participate  in  national  elections.  This  obligation,  is  created  by  the  definition  itself  of  “political  parties”  which  is  provided  in  the  Political  Parties  Act, (no  5  of  1992).  That  Act  provides  as  follows:-  “Political  Party”  means  any  organized  group  of  people  formed  for  the  purpose  of  forming  a  Government,  or  a  Local  Authority,  within  the  United  Republic,  through  elections;  or  for  putting up,  or  supporting  candidates  for  such  elections”.  It  is  quite  clear  therefore,  in  the  light  of  that  definition,  that  the  primary  purpose,  or  indeed  the  raison  d’etre),   of  a  political  party  in  Tanzania,  is  to  participate  in  elections,  with  a  view  to  acquiring  power,  either  at  the  national,  or  the  Local  Authority  level,  or  both.   Hence,  any  group  which  does  not  have  such  objectives,  does  not  qualify  for  registration  as  a  “political  party”.  Its  status  then  changes  to  a  ‘pressure  group’,  or  ‘interest  group’,  as  the  case  may  be.                                                        
     The  deliberate  act  of  boycotting  an  election  by  any  political  party   is,  therefore,  an  irresponsible  abandonment  of  this  legal  obligation.   
     (ii)  Its  negative  impact  on  democracy.
Modern  political  thought  generally  accepts  the  notion  that political  parties  are  absolutely  essential  to  democracy;  based  on  the  fundamental  principle  that  ‘democracy  gives  the  majority  the  right  to   rule”.    But  there  is  no  other  way  of  creating  an ascertainable  majority  without  establishing  political  parties,   which  can  freely  in  elections  for  the  right  to  form  a  Government,  by  presenting  their  different  policy  options  and  programmes   to  the  electorate,  with  each  party  endeavouring  to  persuade  that  electorate  to  vote  for  their  particular  policy or  programme.                                                
     This  is  the  political   competition  in  which  the  winning  party  gets  the  right  to  form  the  government  of  the  day.  
In  the  British  political  landscape,   this  system   is  known  as “government  by  political  party”;  and  is  actually   the  basis  of  the  British  “Westminster  model”    of  governance   which  was  invariably  inherited  by  almost  all  of  the  British  former  colonies  and  administered  Territories.
     To   my  little  knowledge  and   understanding,  no  single  political   system  can  claim  to  be  perfect.  And   this  system  of  “government  by  political  party”,  is  no  exception;  for  the  following  reasons:- 
    (a)  that  a  given  political  party,  having  been  elected  to  power,   may  thereafter  act  viciously  towards  its  political  opponents.   And   the  world  has  seen  enough  such  examples.                                    
     (b)  that,  especially  in  respect  of  those  jurisdictions  where  the  parties  are  divided  over  some  fundamental  issues,  all  those  who  voted  for  the  losing  parties (and  they  could  be  very  many),   may  be   governed  for  long  periods   on  the  basis  of  policies  and  programmes  with  which  they  disagree;    which,  obviously,    is   to  their  great  disadvantage".
 (c)   that  able  men  and  women  who  are  outside  the  party  system,  or  who  belong  to  minority  parties  which  have  no  chance  of  winning  an  election,  can  play  no  effective  role  in  the  governance  system  of  their  country.  
However,  within   the  United  Kingdom   itself  from   where   this  system  originated,  such  difficulties  appear  to  have  been  satisfactorily  resolved;   for  in  their  case,   the  system  appears   to  be  working  normally.    Some  of  their  general  elections  have  indeed  produced   “hung  Parliaments”;  but   such  difficulties   were  quickly    resolved   by  forming  functional   ‘coalitions’  between  different  parties,  which  enabled  their   Governments  to  obtain  the  necessary  Parliamentary  majority  of  MPs,  thus  enabling  their  Parliament  to  function   normally.                                                                                                                And  for  those  of  their  citizens  who   cannot  play  an  effective  role  in  the  governance  of  their  country  (because    they   belong  to  minority  parties  that  have  no  chance  of  winning  an  election,  or  are  outside  the  party  system);    these,  presumably,   have  developed   a  “culture  of  tolerance “;  and   are  happy  to  live  with   that  system,  despite  its  disadvantages. 
Our  recurring  difficulties  in  operating  this  system
It  has  been  my  constant  contention   that,    because  in   many   of  our  ex-colonial   communities,   there  is  a   serious   lack  of   the  requisite  “multi-party   political  culture”,   this  deficiency  has,  inevitably,   caused  difficulties  in  operating  this  system  in  our  respective  countries.                                              
        A  case  in  point  is  Zanzibar,   the  other  partner  of  the  United  Republic  of  Tanzania,   which   has  had  an  unfortunate  history  of   endless  post-election  disputes,  ever  since   their   first  multi-party  Presidential   election,   that  was   held   soon  after  this   system  was  re-introduced   in  our  country,  way  back  in  1995.  
      The  problem  in  1995  was  caused  by  certain  suspicious  actions  taken  by  the  Zanzibar  Electoral  Commission  (ZEC)  during  the  counting  of   the  Zanzibar  Presidential  election  votes,   particularly  the  inordinate  (and  unexplained)   delay   in  the  counting  of  those   votes  which,  understandably,  made  the    Opposition  Civic  United  Front  (CUF)   highly  suspicious,  that  the  reason  for  this  delay   was  that   the  Presidential  results  were  probably  being  “doctored”  in  favour  of  the   CCM  candidate.   This  suspicion  intensified  when  the  announced  results  gave  the  CCM  Presidential   candidate,   a  ‘razor-thin  majority’  of  only  0.4% .  And,  as  a  consequence,    CUF  refused  to  recognize  these  results.
        It  happened  again  during  the  next  following    Zanzibar  Presidential  election  in  2000.  In  that  case,  there  had   occurred   certain  serious   election  irregularities,  in  all  the  16  constituencies   of  the   Mjini   Mgharibi   Administrative   Region,  prompting  the  Zanzibar  Electoral  Commission  to  countermand  the  election  in  those  constituencies;  and  ordering    a  re-run  of  the  election  in  those  constituencies,   at   a  later  date.   The  Civic  United  Front,  on  their  part,   requested    a  re-run  of  the  entire  Zanzibar  election,  which  was  refused  by  the   Zanzibar  Electoral  Commission.     Upon  being  denied  their  request ,  CUF  decided  to  boycott   that   entire  re-run   election;  and  their  action  inevitably   produced   the  expected   consequences,  namely  a  ‘negative  impact’   on  our  cherished  democracy;   simply  because  a  large  number  of   registered  voters,  (the  CUF  followers  and  supporters)   were  forced  to  stay  away  from  their  allotted  polling  stations  on  election  day.                                
      That   problem  re-appeared  yet  again  after  the  2005  Zanzibar  general  election,   leading  to  CUF  again   refusing  to  recognize  the Zanzibar   Presidential  election  results.    Fortunately   in  the  meantime,  both  CCM  and  CUF  were  engaged  in  serious  talks  between  them,   in  search   for  a  viable  solution  to  this  continuing  problem.    
    Where  there  is  a  will,  there  is  a  way.
Their  efforts  were  amply  rewarded   when   the  two  political  parties   eventually   signed  the  Agreement  known  as  MUAFAKA  III;    which  introduced  the  concept  of   establishing   a  Government  of  National  Unity ,  or  Serikali  ya   Umoja  wa  Kitaifa  (SUK);   whose  implementation  was  effected  immediately  following  the  2010  Zanzibar  election.   And  the  Zanzibar  Constitution  was  amended  accordingly,  in  order  to  accommodate  this  provision.
 Unfortunately    however,  the   Zanzibar  post-election  problem   of  CUF  refusing  to  accept  the  results  of  the  Zanzibar  Presidential  election,  occurred   yet  again   after  the  2015  election;   thus   disabling   Zanzibar   President   Dr.  Ali  Mohamed  Shein,   from  appointing    Ministers  from  CUF,   into  the   Government  of  National  Unity  Cabinet.                                                                                                                        But   since  this  is  now  a  requirement  of  the  Zanzibar  Constitution,  we  can  only  hope  and  pray,  that  in  respect  of  the  forthcoming  2020  Zanzibar   general  election  better   wisdom  will  prevail,  and  the  main   losers  will  be  willing  to  join  the  Government  of  National  Unity. 
(Will  continue  next  week) /0754767576.
Source: Daily News and Cde Msekwa today. 



Tuesday, 20 October 2020


Ivory Coast and Peril of Third Term in Africa

What’s in the offing in Ivory Coast currently is a menace if isn’t nibbled in the bud timely and quickly. The outgoing president Alassane Ouattara is trying to illegally cling to power. After ascending to power democratically, Ouattara seems to have naively and perilously jilted and pooh-poohed the force that put him to power. He wants more of power. Just like former Malawi president, Bakili Muluzi who attempted it and failed as a sign of learning nothing from democracy, Ouattara’s proves the length a person can go to prove how bankrupt a politician can politically be. It is sad to note that most of those tampering with the constitutions of their countries are viewed as enlightened with signatures of Dr and Professor.  Indeed, absolute power corrupts absolutely. 
    After enjoying the ballyhoos and saccharinity of power, Muluzi wanted to stay longer than two terms allowed constitutionally. Thus, he wanted a third term, which Malawians denied him.  To mention but a few, in Burundi, the DRC and Togo respectively, former presidents, Pierre Nkurunziza, Joseph Kabila and Faure Eyadema got away with blue murder by forcefully and illegally securing more time in office. While other countries such as Cameroon, Equatorial Guinea, Gabon, Rwanda, Uganda and many others, presidents have shown the crave for power, to the contrary, Tanzania’s president John Pombe Magufuli flatly refused to buy into this tyranny despite many Tanzanians asking him to stay on after completing his constitutional two terms of presidency come 2025.
Distressingly, in Ivory Coast where Ouattara, who–––just like Muluzi–––came to power under the groundswell of democracy that saw some dictators pulled down, the lesson seems to be hard to comprehend and grasp. So, too, in Senegal, Abdoulaye Wade tried to perfect third term unconstitutionality to no avail. In neighbouring Burkinabe, former felony, Blaise Compaore, was shown the door after lording it over for many years while in Guinea, the imbroglio is still ongoing.  All such incidents have a great lesson to Ouattara and the like not to forget Africa at large. Will Ouattara get away with murder? Circumstances and time will tell.
         After serving two terms in office, Ouattara illegally wants more time to savor power more. Will Ivorians take a leaf from Malawi and foil this attempt to send the country back to dictatorship or just crouch down and shamelessly destroy their country willy-nilly? Will they replicate their solidarity that saw Robert Guéï–––another tinpot dictator who illegally seized power–––being stymied and pulled down from violating their constitution and rights to remain in power?  While Malawi only suffered from a longtime dictatorship, it never experienced any civil war as is the case with Ivory Coast whose recovery from such a crime has existed just for a decade now when Ouattara wants to kink it back.
Paradoxically, Ouattara had already accepted to relinquish power soon after the expiration of his constitutional two terms. Before Ouattara made a volte-face, the AFP (March 5th, 2020) quoted him as saying “I have decided not to be candidate in the Oct. 31 presidential election and to transfer power to a new generation.” Is he the new generation is talking about that wants to replace himself? Behind the curtains, he’d already handpicked his protégé, former prime minister, Amadou Gon Coulibaly who died on 8th July, 2020 forcing Ouattara to abuse the constitution by deciding to stay on illegally. An African proverb has it that He who is wise endeavours to learn how to understand the truth not less than that. If anything, Ouattara’s doubletalk  is a good hunch for the ECOWAS and Ivorians opposed to power seizure should hang our hat on to force Ouattara to abandon his power greed and hold on power under what Guillaume Soro, former Ouattara ally and prime minister, refers to as elections aimed at endorsing the institutional state coup d’état by Alassane Ouattara.
        In addition,  the Al Jazeera (September 17th, 2020) quoted Soro as saying that he believes there won’t be elections scheduled in October 31st. Up until now, there have already occurred the massacres of four people as the results of the confrontation between Ouattara and those who oppose his bid to presidency. According to the Al Jazeera (August 14th, 2020), three people were killed in the central town of Daoukro in clashes between Ouattara supporters and backers of rival candidate Henri Konan Bedi, also a former president who aspires to run for presidency. To make matters worse, former president Laurent Gbagbo’s party, the Ivorian Popular Front (IFP), wants him to run for president. Interestingly, Ivory Coast, like Mali, seems to suffer from power hunger by its elites. For, in 2000, the mass action supported Gbagbo and forced Guéï out of power; and was thereof killed with his family. Guéï had barred other potential contenders to participate in the election, something Ouattara has replicated despite knowing the danger such a move presents to him and the country. 
Further, methinks the ECOWAS that recently intervened in Mali after the army seized power, needs to timely, quickly and inviolably apply the same. For, what’s to happen in Ivory Coast is no different from what transpired in Mali. The only difference between the two is that a civilian in Ivory Coast wants to stage a coup as opposed to the military in Mali. To me, a coup is a coup. It is bad, dangerous and illegal to any country. Therefore, the ECOWAS should use the same logic, power and vivacity to address the matter in Ivory Coast despite the fact that Ouattara is a friend of many heads of state in the region.
If economic sanctions work in Mali, they also must be applied on Ivory Coast. Actually, the ECOWAS has a precedent. Its intervention in The Gambia, in 2017, peacefully and successfully dislodged a longtime dictator, Yahya Jammeh who didn’t want to relinquish power as was the case with Laurent Gbagbo, Ouattara’s predecessor whose ouster was necessitated by France.
There’s no way the ECOWAS and the international community at large can allow the contempt of the constitution and power grab in Ivory Coast whose politics gyrates around tribalism. When it comes to the lessons from Malawi, it was among the first African country to defeat the dictators through the ballot box whereby Hastings Kamuzu Banda, Malawi’s longtime dictator lost to Muluzi before he too, was forced to abandon his quest to run for the third term in office. The same happened in Zambia shortly before where former president Frederick Chiluba’s attempt to cling to power was foiled by the citizens. 
    Similarly, Malawi set another positive precedent. It became the second country to see presidential victory annulled by the Supreme Courts after Kenya. These are the only two African countries whose presidential wins were declared null and void. In Kenya, president Uhuru Kenyatta went ahead to win the rerun election though, in Malawi the stars didn’t align and thus, once again, proved tough in protecting its democracy after former president professor Peter Mutharika lost the rerun to Lazarus Chakwera.
        A long story short, it is upon the ECOWAS to adequately and decisively resolve the matter and improve and protect democracy or flout it for its credibility peril. For, it is more answerable in this conflict since it has already shown its clout in addressing similar problems even where the African Unity (AU) happened to falter or sleep at the wheel. Arguably, ignoring the situation in Ivory Coast is nothing but double standard that won’t only imperil the region and set a debauched precedent but also encourage other power-crazy monsters to illegally remain in power. If this is allowed, democracy in Africa will receive a hit. There’s no slapping Ouattara in the wrist but in the face to send a strong message. It is time for Ouattara to come of age and own his promise to vacate the office of the president as he promised in March. If he remains adamant and cagey, he’d remember what happened to Gbagbo and Guéï when they tried to cling to power. The ECOWAS should intervene quickly to save democracy in Ivory Coast that shows how third term in office has become Africa’s peril of democracy and the perpetuation of dictatorship.
Source: African Executive Magazine today.


That is how our city looks like today. Snow has arrived; and we've officially started our 2020 wintry season of cold and snow.  Trees have already given in ready to face over six months of stasis. Everybody and everything are trapped in the loop of cold. Those with the luxury of enjoying unending summer seasons must know what we are now facing amidst pandemic. Nature is always punctual and nobody can stop it from acting the way it does. WELCOME WINTER!


Ijumaa nilipata fursa ya kukutana na jamaa hawa kwenye viunga vya chuo chetu kikuu cha Manitoba wakijindaa kuanza safari ya kutuaga baada ya kugundua kuwa kumbe winter inaingia. Hivyo, jamaa wanaaga na kuondoka kuelekea kusini na mashariki kuepuka baridi. Kama mtapata bahati ya kuwaona huko, basi pokea salamu zetu. Kweli siku hazigandi! Salamu zetu kwenu nyote kupitia kwa jamaa hawa wajanja wasioongea au kujidai.