Magufulification: Concept That Will Define Africa's Future and the Man Who Makes Things Happen
Monday, 30 November 2020
Saturday, 28 November 2020
Ni bahati mbaya kuwa baadhi ya wazito wetu wanaosimamia raslimali zetu wanaishi maisha sawa na yale ya waliowang’atua, kuwatimua na kuwarithi ima kwa makusudi au kwa kutojua ukiachia mbali kunogewa na utamu wa hali na mifumo hii. Ni hatari kuwa ni wachache wanaoliona na kulidurusu hili. Tokana na mfumo huu zandiki, nchi za kiafrika zimekuwa zikipoteza fedha nyingi za walipa kodi kutokana na matumizi mabaya ya watu wachache badhirifu na fisadi. Ndiyo maana rais John Pombe Magufuli alipoingia madarakani, alijaribu kuutekeza mfumo huu pale alipofumua baadhi ya mambo kama vile ajira hewa, wanafunzi hewa na matumizi mabaya ya fedha na raslimali za umma bila kusahau rushwa huku akianzisha ubanaji matumizi yaliyolenga kuwakomboa wanyonge. Hii ndiyo siri ya Tanzania kupiga maendeleo haraka na kuweza kuwa kwenye kundi la nchi za kipato cha kati ndani ya miaka mitano; jambo ambalo halijawahi kufanywa na nchi yeyote.
Leo nitatoa baadhi ya mifano kuhusiana na namna Afrika inapaswa kuanza kuangalia mpya mifumo yake ya uongozi na matumizi yasiyo ya lazima. Hivi, katika karne ya 21, kuna haja ya baadhi ya watendaji wetu kuwa na ma-bodyguard au madereva wakati hawana tishio lolote tokana na kuwatumikia wananchi–––kama kweli wanawatumikia–––wananchi au kuweza kufanya kama vile kuendesha magari yao kwenda na kurudi makazini? Hapa Kanada, wazito wengi huendesha magari yao na hawana ma-bodyguard au madereva tokana na kuwahudumia waliowachagua vilivyo. Je hawa wetu wanamuogopa nani kama kweli wanawahudumia mabosi wao ambao ni wale wanaowawakilisha? Je ni fedha kiasi gani tunapoteza tokana na ukale na mfumo huu wa kikoloni? Wakoloni walihitaji madereva kwa vile hawakujua nchi zetu. Walihitaji ma-bodyguard kwa vile walikuwa wakitunyanyasa na kutunyonya. Ukiondoa viongozi wa kitaifa ambao wanahitaji ulinzi kama huu, hawa wadogo kama vile wakuu wa mikoa, wilaya na wengine wanahitaji kwa mfano madereva na wasaidizi wakati ni watumishi wa kawaida?
Hapa Kanada majaji, na wakuu wengine hujiendesha wenyewe. Chukulia mfano majaji. Kama wanahitaji madereva ili wasichoke, inakuwaje maprofesa wanaowaandaa hawa majaji au madaktari wanaookoa maisha ya watu wanajiendesha na hakuna kinachoharibika?
Kimsingi, wenzetu wa nchi za Magharibi walioanzisha mifumo fujaji na nyonyaji kwa makusudi mazima. Mfano, wakuu wa kila idara walilindwa kwa hofu ya kudhuriwa na wale waliokuwa wakiwatawala kimabavu na bila faida.
Hakika, tunapaswa kuanza kutoza kodi viongozi au watumishi wa umma wanaopata mishahara mikubwa na huduma za bure kama hizi za madereva na wasaidizi wasiohitajika. Ukiachia mbali watumishi wa umma, huku si rahisi kuwa na wasichana wa kazi kama ilivyo nyumbani. Hii ni kwa sababu hakuna mwenye uwezo wa kuwalipa mshahara wa kiwango cha chini ambao kila mmoja wa wafanyakazi wa kawaida analipwa. Hivyo, uwepo wa uwezekano wa kuajiri wasichana wa kazi ni njia mojawapo ya kinyonyaji ambayo inapaswa kuangaliwa sambamba na maslahi ya wakubwa yasiyo na faida wala ulazima kwa taifa.
Kwa vile rais Magufuli anasifika kwa kubana matumizi, anapaswa kuanza kuangalia maeneo ya wasaidizi wake wa ngazi mbali mbali kuanzia wizara, mikoa, wilaya na idara mbali mbali. Akifanya hivi, ataokoa mabilioni ya fedha ambayo yatamsaidia kufikia azma yake ya kuibadili Tanzania haraka iwezekanavyo.
Mwisho, hebu tujiulize. Ni fedha kiasi gani tunapoteza kama nchi na jamii kwa kuendekeza mfumo huu ambao waliouanzisha na kuuacha walishaachana nao zamani tokana na kujua madhara yake kwa watu wao na mataifa yao? Wakoloni waliweka mfumo huu wa kinyonyaji na kivivu kwa vile walikuwa hawawatumikii wananchi bali kuwatumia na kuwanyonya kwa faida ya mataifa yaliyowatuma. Isitoshe, waliofaidi hizi huduma ni maafisa wa kikoloni tu na si wananchi.
Kama profesa au wakili anaweza kuendesha gari lake, inakuwaje vigumu kwa majaji kufanya hivyo? We need to decolonise our systems along with our public officials.
Chanzo: Nipashe Jumapili kesho.
Friday, 27 November 2020
Wednesday, 25 November 2020
A MANUAL FOR MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT:Assisting the newly elected MPs to understand the Rules of Procedure.
This statement is equally relevant to almost all newly elected members, not only those at the Palace of Westminster in London; but of many other Parliaments elsewhere, including that of Tanzania. The main reason for the alleged ‘mystery’ is that the Rules of procedure, as well as the other conventions and processes of Parliament, will of course be completely new and totally unfamiliar to them. This will be much the same for the newly elected (and nominated) members of the Tanzania Parliament who are now on their way to Dodoma, ready to carry out the job for which they have just been elected.
This article is intended to assist them in understanding the Rules of Procedure which guide the deliberations of that august House, the Parliament of the United Republic of Tanzania; and also, equally important, to understand the other parliamentary processes and principles (known as conventions), which they must observe. I am aware of the tradition under which the Speaker’s Office arranges special seminars for the newly elected MPs in order to expose them to the Rules of procedure which are used in the National Assembly. Because of that, I will only focus on explaining those unwritten principles, or conventions, which are not usually included in the presentations made during the said seminars, but a knowledge of which is equally important for the members.
The Parliamentary conventions.
The word “convention” as used in the context of this article, means ‘the way in which something is usually done’. The purpose here is to explain those things which are usually done in relation to our Parliament, but which are generally unknown, because they are not written in any law, not even in the formal Rules of procedure. The relevant parliamentary conventions include the following:
(i) The convention of starting Parliamentary sessions always on a Tuesday.
The Tanzania Parliament normally holds four sessions in every calendar year, generally in the months of February, April, June/July (the Budget session), and in November.
The most enduring tradition in this respect is that these sessions always commence on a Tuesday. That is why even the first session of the 11th Parliament has been summoned to commence its business on Tuesday, 17th November, 2015. It is classified as a ‘convention’ because it is not expressly provided for in any written Rule of Parliamentary procedure.
(ii) The convention of recognizing what is known as ‘the two sides of the House’.
The ‘two sides of the House’ means the Government side, and the Opposition side.
Traditionally, members of the Ruling Party and members of the Opposition parties sit on opposite sides in the House. Members of the Ruling Party are normally allocated seats on the right-hand side of the Speaker’s chair, while members of the Opposition are allocated seats on the opposite side, to the left of the Speaker’s chair.
This convention was inherited at the time of independence from British House of Commons practice but became unnecessary and was abolished upon the introduction of the One-Party Constitution in 1965, which eliminated opposition parties from the House. However, the practice was re-introduced upon the re-introduction of the multi-party Parliament in 1995.
(iii) The convention of recognizing the ‘essential role of political parties’ in the House.
This convention is based on the presumption that political parties are a fundamental factor in the Parliamentary system of governance. And because the road to Parliament is through elections, that is why political parties have been given such a vital role to play in the matter of elections. These parties must compete in the elections in order to enter Parliament; and serious competition always involves two essential things, one is organization, and the other is discipline.
The important point to be noted here is that political competition between political parties does not stop when the elections are over, but it now shifts to Parliament, and shifts together with its twin requirements of party organization and party discipline.
(iv) The convention of accepting ‘party discipline’ in the House.
This arises from the fact that political competition shifts to Parliament immediately after the elections are over. The tradition of maintaining party discipline in the House is in fact fully recognized by the Rules of the House; that is why these Rules make provision for the appointment of a leader known as the “Government Chief Whip” for the purpose of supervising the maintenance of party discipline on the parliamentary side of the ruling party; as well as the appointment of another leader known as ‘the Leader of the official Opposition’ for the same purpose of supervising the maintenance of party discipline on the opposition side of the House.
The Government Chief Whip is a kind of prefect. His job is to supervise the performance of Ministers within the House, as well as that of the other members of the ruling party, in order to ensure that they generally act as one solid team in supporting their government.
Similarly, the Leader of the Official Opposition also acts as a kind of prefect. His job is to ensure that members sitting on the opposition side of the House are united and disciplined in carrying out their constitutional task of securing continuous accountability by the government in the performance of its duties and functions.
It is precisely for this reason that the Leader of the official opposition is mandated to form what is known as a ‘shadow cabinet’, each member of this group is given a particular range of activities, which normally are the responsibility of a specific government Minister, for which he is expected to direct criticism against the government’s policy and performance in respect of that particular Government Ministry.
The Opposition’s weapons inside Parliament are: (a) asking questions, and (b) active participation in debate. In carrying out these functions, the Opposition has to bear in mind two important objectives. One is to ensure that the Government is at all times kept actively on its feet in the performance of its responsibilities; but its second equally important objective is to endeavour to achieve, if possible, the government’s defeat at the next general election. This is normally done by the opposition side trying to demonstrate to the general public, either through the strength of their parliamentary questions which they put to Ministers (aimed at demonstrating the government’s failure to perform), or through powerful and convincing arguments against the government, put forward in speeches delivered by their members during debates in the House. This is perhaps easier said than done; because in order for them to succeed in performing this function, the Opposition must be presenting what is commonly described as “constructive and responsible criticism”, so as to demonstrate to the public that they are indeed capable of forming a viable alternative government.
(v) The convention of the ‘alternative Government-in-waiting’.
Under this convention, ‘the shadow cabinet’ is regarded as the alternative ‘Government-in-waiting’. This convention was designed to operate when the Opposition succeeds in defeating the government at a general election, whereby members of the erstwhile shadow cabinet now become ministers in the new government.
This convention is a key factor in the Parliamentary system of governance, which is designed to operate on the basis of “government by political party”, namely that the political party which wins an election forms the government of the day, but the losers continue with their challenges to the government from the opposition benches inside Parliament, in preparation for the next election.
The parliamentary Rules of procedure.
In the language of Parliament, the Rules of procedure of the National Assembly are known as “Standing Orders”. They are made (and amended from time to time as may be necessary) by the House itself, under authority granted to it by article 89 of the Constitution of the United Republic.
Understanding the Rules of procedure is indeed the first and foremost obligation of every member of Parliament. Some wise man once observed that “ a system can work well only if the people who are entrusted to operate it not only believe in that system, but actually struggle to make it work”. Members of Parliament are strongly encouraged to struggle to make our parliamentary system work well by acquiring a proper knowledge of its Rules of procedure. Such knowledge will at least enable them to avoid committing the kind of procedural mistakes, or even outright breaches of these rules, which might necessitate the intervention of the Speaker.
A summary of the relevant Rules.
For the purpose of assisting the new members of Parliament to understand the most relevant Rules of procedure which govern their participation during debates in the House, as well as the maintenance of order and decorum therein, a summary of these Rules is presented very briefly below.
Categories of parliamentary business.
There are two main categories of business which is transected in the House every day, each of which has a set of applicable rules. They are: (a) Questions to Ministers, and (b) motions which are moved to initiate debate.
(a) Questions to Ministers.
The rules applicable in the case of questions to Ministers include the requirement of notice to be given, the valid purpose of asking questions, the manner of asking them, and the Speaker’s control of questions.
(b) Motions to be moved.
Every debate in the House is introduced by way of a motion (Hoja) moved by a Minister (in the case of government business) or, for non-government business, by any other member.
The general rule is that the process of debate in the House must commence with a motion being moved to that effect by the person responsible for the matter which is to be discussed. Such motion must be seconded by another member, failure of which renders the motion ineligible for debate. There are several rules governing the introduction of motions, including the requirement for notice to be given, the manner of giving such notice, the minimum period of notice required, the form and content of motions, and the withdrawal of such notices where necessary. There are also rules governing amendments to motions, particularly with regard to the form and contents of such amendments
The rules governing debates.
Debate is the everyday business of the House. There is a set of Rules governing debate in the House. These include the time and manner of speaking in debate, how to raise ‘a point of order’, and the right of reply for the mover of the motion which is under discussion. There are also rules which govern the contents and relevance of speeches which, for example, forbid the interchange of personal abuses, and the use of what is known as ‘un-parliamentary language’; they also forbid allegations being made against persons outside the House, and the citing of documents which are not before the House.
Other Rules provide for the maintenance of order and decorum in the House.
The procedure for making decisions.
All decisions which are made in Parliament are made through public (and not secret) voting by the members present and at the material time. This is done either by voice vote, or by roll-call of the names of all the members present. With very few specified exceptions, Parliamentary decisions are never made by secret vote. The only exceptions are when members are voting to elect their leaders, namely the Speaker and the Deputy Speaker; and when they are voting to approve the name of a new Prime Minister submitted to them by the President. It is only in these specified cases that members are required to make their decisions by secret vote.
The requirements for making valid decisions by Parliament are provided for in the Constitution of the United Republic, as follows:
(i) There must be a quorum in the House at the time of voting to adopt any motion, (which is one half of all the members of Parliament).
(ii) A decision becomes valid if made by a simple majority of the members present and
voting on the relevant motion, except where the Constitution provides otherwise.
(iii) The Constitution has indeed provided otherwise in three specific cases, namely (a) when Parliament is making amendments to the Constitution; (b) when Parliament is passing a resolution to impeach the President, aimed at removing him from power; and (c) when Parliament is passing a resolution to remove the Speaker from power.
In all these cases, the requirement is for a two thirds majority of all the members of Parliament.
Saturday, 21 November 2020
Watanzania ni ndugu na tunaheshimiana tukishindana kwa hoja na si mapanga. Hakuna haja ya bunge letu kugeuzwa kijiwe cha uhuni na matusi. Hakuna mtanzania anayeweza kulinganishwa na mbwa hata awe hakubaliani nasi. Unapowaita wapinzani mbwa unakaribisha yafuatayo:
Mosi, unawapa fursa wakujibu kwa kukutakana wewe na hata taasisi matusi mengi mazito bila sababu. Kwanini kulinganisha watanzania na mbwa wakati–––kama ni misemo ya busara ya kukaripia kadhia hii–––ipo tena mingi? Mfano, msemaji angesema kuwa kelele za mpangaji hazimnyimi usingizi mwenye nyumba. Tuwe na bunge la kistaarabu kama ambavyo ilikuwa kwenye kampeni; na si la matusi na visasi.
Pili, kuwaita wapinzani mbwa maana yake ni kuwaita watanzania wote mbwa. Kwani, wapinzani nao ni watanzania sawa na watanzania wengine. Wanaweza kukosa, kukosea na mengine kama hayo. Lakini bado hakuna mwenye haki ya kuwaita au kuwalinganisha na mbwa. Hivi nao wakiamua kukuita wewe na wenzio mbwa utafurahi na kuvumilia? Usiishi kwenye nyumba ya vioo ukawatukana watupa mawe.
Tatu, kwa kuwaita wapinzani mbwa, msemaji alipaswa ajue anamaanisha kuwa walishindana na kuwadhinda mbwa jambo ambalo haliingii akilini. Kwani, mbwa hawezi kushindana na binadamu bali mbwa wenzake. Kuna usemi maarufu kuwa jogoo aliwafundisha vifaranga kunya ndani. Hakuna haja ya watu walioshinda tena kwa kitsunami kuruhusu watu wachache wasiojua taratibu kuanza kupotezea heshima na utu kama jamii ya watu na taifa.
Nne, kutolea matusi bungeni ni kuliondolea heshima na utukufu wake kama linavyoitwa siku zote. Bunge tukufu haliwezi kuruhusu matusi iwe kwa makusudi au bahati mbaya. Hivyo, ni vizuri wakubwa wa taasisi hii muhimu wakawaonya wanagezi wasiojua lugha za kutumia kwenye chombo muhimu kama hiki. Isitoshe, mbunge anayewawakilisha kweli wananchi, hajatumwa kutukana wenzake. Isitoshe, sijui kama kuna chama chenye sera ya matusi ya nguoni kama haya.
Tano, watu wazima wanapotukana, tena matusi ya nguoni kama haya hadharani, wanatoa picha mbaya na somo baya kwa watoto na vijana wetu. Watu wa namna hii wanaoshindwa kuona madhara ya maneno na matendo yao, hawalisaidii taifa wala hawawatendei haki wale wanaowawakilisha ima hawajui wajibu wao na ukubwa wa jukumu la uwakilishaji wananchi.
Je–––baada ya haya kufanyika na ushahidi kutamalaki kwenye vyombo mbali mbali vya Habari–––nini kifanyike? Tunashauri yafuatayo:
Mosi, kuna haya ya bunge kutoa waraka maalum kwa wabunge–––hasa wale wageni bungeni–––juu ya lugha na mienendo inayotakiwa bungeni.
Pili, inapotokea mbunge kama huyu akapotoka na kuropa, basi spika au mkuu yeyote wa chombo husika amkaripia au kumpa adhabu mhusika papo hapo au baada ya kupata taarifa au malalamiko bila kujali yanatoka kwa nani. Katiba ya Tanzania iko wazi juu ya hadhi na nafasi ya binadamu kuwa wote tupo sawa mbele ya katiba na sheria.
Hivyo, yeyote anayedhamiria kutukana, kwanza ajiulize yeye ni nani na anayemtukana ni nani? Wajibu wa kulinda heshima ya watanzania na taifa ni wa kila mtanzania. Kwani katiba yetu iko wazi kuwa binadamu wote ni sawa na kila mtu anastahili heshima na ulinzi toka katika jamii.
Tumalizie tulipoanzia. Si busara wala akili kuwatukana watanzania kwa kuwalinganisha na mbwa–––mnyama anayedharauliwa kuliko wote katika karibu mila zote za kiafrika. Si vizuri. Kama rais alivyosema, tupingane kwa hoja chanya na si matusi ambayo yanaweza kusababisha vurugu. Hakuna haja ya kukaribisha vituko kwenye bunge, taasisi ambayo si tukufu tu bali ni muhimu kama mmojawapo wa mhimili wa taifa. Tuonane wiki ijayo.
Wednesday, 18 November 2020
There were two outstanding features of the 2020 general election that have, inevitably, attracted public discussion. They were: (a) the low turnout of voters, compared to the 2015 general election; and (b) the presumed ‘adverse effect’ in Parliament, of CCM’s landslide victory which has completely eliminated the official Opposition camp of ‘shadow ministers’ from the House..
The low turnout of voters during the 2020 general election has been the subject of discussion among the community, mainly for the purpose of trying to establish the cause for such political apathy. The voting statistics show that only 51% of all the registered voters actually turned up to cast their votes at their respective polling stations on election day, 28th October, 2020. This phenomenon is commonly described as “voter apathy”; and is a usual occurrence in many other jurisdictions in which the voting exercise is not a compulsory legal requirement, as is the case in Australia.
It will probably be remembered, that this phenomenon (of registered voters staying away from polling stations), also happened in respect of our 2010 general election ; when the voter turnout was even lower; a dismal 42.8%, down from a high 84% (of 10,088,484) registered voters) in 2000; and 72% (of 16,442,657 registered voters) in 2005. But subsequently, the voter turnout rose to 67% (of 23,161,440 registered voters) in 2015; but went down again this year, to 51% (of 29,188,347 registered voters).
The CITIZEN Newspaper of 1st November, 2020, helpfully reported the views expressed by some of the political analysts whom it had interviewed. An analysts from the University of Dar es Salaam, Prof Ibrahim Bakari, is reported to have said that this low turnout was due to “lack of faith in the electoral system”. With due respect, Prof Bakari is obviously biased. The electoral system has not changed since election year 2000, when the voter turnout was a high 84%. If, indeed, Tanzanians had “no faith” in the system itself; how will he explain that high turnout?
Another University don, Dr. Paul Luisulie from the University of Dodoma, is reported to have given the view that “there were those who fell sick on election day, and others who were travelling, or had to attend to urgent matters”. Again, with due respect, that cannot be a plausible explanation for such a large number of absentees from polling stations. Yes, people must have travelled on election day, and others must have been sick, but certainly not in such large numbers! There must therefore be other reasons which would account for this “voter apathy “, which occurs alternatively between high and low turnouts.
My own recollection of the low voter turnout in the 2010 general election, is that it was primarily based on a silent political protest, based on the following two factors:- One, that was the period when CCM’s popularity was at its lowest ebb, the party being faced with serious accusations of mega corruption among its leaders at the national level, plus many other serious human failings such as the plundering public funds with impunity, and an assortment of other evils.
On the contrary, the 2015 Presidential election offered very bright prospects for the Opposition CHADEMA party to win the Presidential election. This was because of the extraordinary high popularity of that party’s candidate, Edward Lowassa; which was a sufficient inducement for the Opposition parties’ supporters, and many others, to turn up in big numbers, to vote for Lowassa, their preferred candidate; which accounts for the rise in voter turnout to a decent 67%.
There is not enough information yet, to explain this year’s general election’s similarly large absenteeism of registered voters from their respective polling stations. But one plausible explanation could be, that those who did not want CCM to win the election, but saw no reasonable chance for the Opposition parties winning it, just decided to boycott the voting exercise, in order to deny victory to CCM.
The effect of CCM’s landslide victory.
CCM’s landslide victory is another feature of the 2020 general election that has generated discussion among the community, focusing mainly on wondering what its effect of parliamentary proceedings will be; with many discussants speculating that because of the absence of the Official Opposition therein, parliamentary debates are likely to be ‘dull and uninteresting’.
With due respect, I have a totally different version of that story. With my little experience of how Parliament works in practice, having presided over its proceedings during both the ‘one-party era and the subsequent multiparty period, my humble submission is that the anticipated parliamentary proceeding may probably appear to be “dull and uninteresting”, but this will apply only to those ‘ simple minded’ members of the community, who seek mere ‘entertainment’ (usanii) from such serious parliamentary proceedings, which normally relate to serious national matters such as the passing of the country’s laws, and voting money for implementing the country’s development projects; matters which the Official Opposition camp in Parliament has always opposed, dramatically shouting their “NO”” votes to every Government proposal, (including proposals for the Government annual budget, which also pays their personal salaries and other emoluments) !
On the contrary, the public should expect to see some lively contributions of fresh ideas from the newly elected youthful CCM MPS, who will be determined to prove to their constituents (the voters who elected them), that they, indeed, made the right and proper choices.
The late President Nyerere, had occasion to offer his views on this matter, in one of his powerful written presentations, i as follows :- “ The system of multi-party politics, is justifiable only when there are parties which are divided over some fundamental issues. Otherwise, that system only encourages the growth of factionalism.
It is my submission, that the 12th Parliament fits perfectly very well in that description; namely that it consists of the ‘best individuals’ who have been freely chosen by the electorate; and who will examine, with due diligence, all the proposals which will be brought before them in Parliament. There will therefore be no possibility of its proceedings being “dull and uninteresting”.
Then there is also the little matter of CHADEMA’s strange refusal, to submit the names of their candidates for the 19 women seats which have been allotted to them. Apart from its meager political value of a protest demonstration, such action will have no meaningful effect whatsoever on the proceedings of Parliament; since the number of MPs who have taken the oath, is already more than enough to form the required quorum (which is half of the total membership of the House) for the House to make valid decisions on any matter. There is thus no danger of any of its decisions being challenged in court, merely for lack of validity.
firstname.lastname@example.org / 0754767576.
Monday, 16 November 2020
Looking at and considering what is currently ongoing in Ethiopia where the federal government is battling it out with the Tigray rebels, Africa is poised to fragment even more. It started with the secede of Eritrea. Thereafter, in the neighbouring Sudan, South Sudan followed. Instead of reducing the number of its feeble and fickle state the Berlin Conference cloned, Africa saw the swelling of the number. Since 2006, Somalia led the way to this political suttee by being fragmented into pieces. Currently, the English speaking Ambazonia in Cameroon is fighting for secession. Coastal Kenya and Darfur, Kordofan and Nuba Mountain in Sudan would like to follow the suit shall opportune moment come. Considering such second division of Africa resulting from the first one in Berlin, it becomes difficult to predict how Africa will be in the near future shall this madness and silliness of session–––be they of secessionists and federalists or unionists–––being addressed timely and quickly.
Moldavians have elected a new female President Maia Sandu (48) after she beat the incumbent Igor Dodon. Sandu had a very uphill task to convince the voters. Her opponents said she was unmarried. Thus, unsuitable for Presidency or Premiership while there have been unmarried Presidents famous of them being former Presidents Ian Khama (Botswana), Malawian Hastings Kamuzu Banda, Bishop Michael Christodoulou Mouskos famously Makarios III of Cyprus, South Korean President Park Geun Hye, Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte, Bolivian President Evo Morales, Philippines President Benigno Aquino III, Lithuanian President Dalia Grybauskaite and incumbent Russian President Vladimir Putin among others. Despite that she won. On the same note, this month marked the fall of the incumbents. In the neighbouring Malawi, Peter Mutharika lost to Lazarus Chakwera while Donald Trump to Joe Biden just recently in the US. Similarly, Kolinda Grabar-Kitarović (Croatia) lost to Zoran Milanović. Sandu becomes the only female winner while Grabar-Kitarović becomes the only loser. Congrats big girl on your victory.
Though it all depend on how the second term will come to its finality, Prime Minister Majaliwa Kassim Majaliwa–––like was for Fredrick Tluway Sumaye–––is poised to make history by becoming PM for two terms, which is rare in turbulent politics shaped by competitions. As it was for former President Benjamin W. Mkapa, President John Pombe Magufuli seems to stick with his PM. This tells how competent and cooperative the man is. Many love and tremble when President Magufuli appoint them. To finish the term under Magufuli whose speed is next to never in matters of hardworking, is not a small feat so to speak. Thus, congrats ndugu Majaliwa for winning the heart of your boss whose viwango, if I can borrow from the late Samuel Sitta are unbeatable. Similarly, let me congratulate Ministers Philip Mpango and Palamagamba Kabudi on their re-appointment. Congrats all.
Sunday, 15 November 2020
The US and the West in general used to send electoral observers globally. Is it time for those who used to be at the receiving end to reciprocate by sending their observers whenever conduct its elections? As things stand, it seems, to me, that what used to be an archetypal democracy isn't really. As the votes are counted after the 2020 general elections, the US seems to have quickly lost its thump and brio. Who’d think that the president of the self-appointed leader of the free is not free? Neither does the president of the US trust his own institutions, democratic institutions. President Donald Trump has clearly shown that democracy we used to know isn’t actually what it is, but it is only logical and meaningful when he wins.
Despite one of the tenets of democracy revolving around winning and losing, for, Trump and the like, democracy becomes fraud and deceit when he loses. That is why Trump is ready to destabilize the country in pursuing for his narrow and personal interests. As a former president and businessman, Trump knows the results of his greed. Stock markets are likely to respond negatively as they always do amidst instability. If at all Trump were a patriot as he always wants Americans to believe he is, would have underscore the dangers this imbroglio poses to the economy of the US and the world in general. But again, not for Trump, a self-seeker and “a pathological liar (Sen. Bernie Sanders, Al Jazeera, 11/11/2020)or a conman (Joe Walsh, former Trump supporter, Al Jazeera, 15/11, 2020)who will stop at nothing but power and glory that he has already squarely lost. When will he come to his sense? Nobody's guess so to speak.
Knowing how poochy and proud the US has been in tutoring democracy to others, many are dazed to see how chaotic elections in the US have become. Will Trump destroy the entity, the US that cloned him or the US destroy its clone? The situation is jumpy in the US after being polarized by the politics of the tummy under Trump. US' international stature is long gone. Trump has squandered everything by setting the country against almost everybody except Israel and Russia and many stinking dictators in the Middle East and North Korea.
If there are losers along with Trump are none other than Benjamin Netanyahu and Saudi Arabia crown prince, Mohamed bin Salman who used Trump as their stooge in doing their dirty laundries and covering their dirty asses. After getting to power, Trump turned America into his private estate for benefiting and employing his daughters, sons, daughters in law, sons in law and courtiers who abused the office of the president willy-nilly. Instead of showing leadership, Trump and co really showed lack of it. Instead of serving the country, they served themselves. Instead of respecting the constitution, they defalcated it and defecated on it with impunity. Of all, Americans will never forgive Trump for mishandling Covid-19 pandemic. If anything, this hugely factored into the defeat of Trump whom many people globally loved to see him lose.
Furthermore, Trump, a self-confessed misogynist, racist and white supremacist, is known for hating non-whites. Refer to how he called African countries shitholes and Mexicans drug pushers and rapists. As if that wasn't enough, Trump waged war inside and outside the country. If there's anything Trump will be remembered for is nothing but fracturing the US and the world around cheap fundamentalism and toxicity as the leader of the most powerful economy on earth. To cap it all, up until now, Trump seems hellbent to stay in office illegally. Will he succeed? Again, why Trump has behaved and misbehaved this way? The simplest answer one can offer is that Trump, since he was born, has lived in his own bubble or realities instead of living in real realities almost in every matter. Now that it has downed on him, will Trump max up his disloyalty to the US or just biting the bullet and let things proceed as they naturally are supposed to as far as presidency is concerned? How will Americans judge Trump and his controversial and convoluted presidency?
The US that used to teach other democracy now needs to be taught about the same. The country that used to take pride in its institutions needs to be taught how to create and respect healthy institutions. Is it true that the elections in the US were a fraud and its democracy a white elephant? Who knows? Although people may blame Trump for his stinking corruption and mischiefs, they need to blame themselves for creating and empowering him. How could sane people hand over the power to the person who has no clue about it? Though the world has concentrated on Trump as a person, they need to turn their attention to see the cause roots of all this uselessness as a country. As country born of sin of colonialism, thuggery and slavery, is it the time for the US to pay for its sins?
Now that Joe Biden US president-elect after fairly defeating Trump, will he expiate the peccadillos the US has always suffered so as democratically become yet another third world? Will the US keep its snide behaviour about teaching others democracy? Will it have the guts and gist of calling the likes of China and Russia dictatorships? Time will accurately and timely tell.
Saturday, 14 November 2020
Kwa waswahili wa Dar Es Salaam na Afrika Mashariki watakuwa wameshangaa ubora wa ghafla wa Kamala. Mama huyu mwenye umri wa miaka 56 ni mtoto wa Daktari Donald Jasper Harris Mjamaica na mama wa kihindi marehemu Daktari Shaymala Gopalan. Kwa vile urathi wa mtoto hufuata kiumeni, Harris ni mswahili. Pamoja na kuwa na asili ya kihindi, ni vigumu kumnasibisha na India kiasi cha kuamsha hamasa na mapenzi makubwa kwa watu wanaoishi kwenye na kushikilia mfumo wa kibaguzi (caste) ambapo kuoa au kuolewa na mswahili au mtu wa tabaka jingine ni kitu kisichokubalika wala kuwezekana na nuksi kwa familia ya mhusika na jamii kwa ujumla. Sina haja ya kuleta hisia za kibaguzi bali kusema ukweli japo–––kama jamii na watu–––tujifunze kuwa wakweli kwa nafsi zetu.
Kama Kamala, mswahili mwenye asili ya Jamaica angegombea hata ujumbe wa nyumba kumi nchini India hata katika baadhiya nchi za kiAfrika, angeambulia patupu. Pamoja na ubabe wao, hapa wamarekani wanatufundisha somo la usawa ambalo limezishinda nchi nyingi hasa za Afrika na Asia. Sijui kama kuna mswahili au mtu yeyote mwenye asili ya Afrika mwenye cheo chochote katika bara la Asia hata kiwe kidogo namna gani.
Niliwahi kusema kuwa kama rais wa zamani wa Marekani mwafrika Barack Obama mswahili mKenya, angekulia Afrika, asingekuwa rais hata wa nchi ndogo yoyote tokana na ubaguzi wa kisheria utakao mgombeaji wadhifa huu awe amezaliwa na wazazi raia waliozaliwa katika nchi husika. Sambamba, sidhani kama Kamala angeweza kuchaguliwa kuwa rais wa Jamaica au–––kama nilivyodokeza hapo juu–––taifa lolote la Afrika au Asia. Hii inaonyesha namna tulivyo wabaguzi kuliko hata hawa wamerekani tunaowatuhumu ubaguzi na ukandamizaji japo hii haiondoi kadhia hii kwao na kwetu. Jiulize kwa mfano, mataifa mengi ya Afrika yanakataa uraia pacha wakati mataifa tajiri ya Magharibi hayana pingamizi hili tena kwa watu maskini toka Afrika na Asia. Pingamizi hili linatupa taabu waswahili tuliko huku. Kwani, hushindwa kufaidi baadhi ya fursa kama masomo na nyingine kwa kuogopa kukana uraia wetu kitu ambacho ni kikwazo nyumbani na hapa ughaibuni. Mfano, mswahili ambaye hana uraia wa Kanada ukijiunga na chuo chochote unalipia mara tatu. Kuepuka hili, inakupasa ukae Kanada kwa miaka ili upate ukazi wa kudumu angalau uweze kupunguza makali ya huduma kama hizi ambazo ni nafuu kwa wananchi na kidogo kwa wakazi.
Ukiangalia ni kwanini taifa la Marekani limeendelea, utagundua kuwa tabia yake ya kumkubali mtu kama alivyo, hasa inapokuja kwenye mchango wake kwa taifa, ndiyo imekuwa chachu yake kubwa ya maendeleo ambayo hivi karibuni ilikuwa imedumazwa na Trump ambaye alikuwa na mtazamo wa kuangalia ndani na nyuma bila kuangalia mbele (backward and inward looking). Tokana na udhaifu huu, wamarekani, hasa chama cha Democrat, kiliamua kuutumia na kumuangusha.
Kwa sasa Afrika na Jamaica zinajivuna kuwa na binti yao kwenye Jumba Jeupe (White House) akiwa ameweka historia katika taifa hili ndani ya muda mfupi baada ya mwingine kukaa pale akiwa ndiye bosi. Asia nayo, inataka kipande cha keki cha ufanisi huu wa kinadharia ambao kivitendo, hauna lolote la kuisadia Afrika wala Asia ikizingatiwa kuwa sera za Marekani huendeshwa kitaasisi na si kwa kutegemea ni nani aliyeko ikulu japo mwenye kuwepo anaweza kuvuruga mambo kwa kiasi kikubwa kama ilivyotokea kwa Trump.
Tumalizie tuliopanzia. Umefika wakati wa Afrika kujifunza kutoka kwa waliotutawala linapokuja suala la uwezo wa mtu binafsi. Tuwapokee wote wenye asili yetu kama wanavyopokelewa ughaibuni ili waweze kuchangia kwa bara letu pendwa. Laiti mgombea yoyote wa urais wa Afrika au Asia angeambiwa amteue mgombea mwenza kama Kamala Harris, licha ya kuchekwa na kuzuiliwa, angeonekana kama hamnazo; kwa vile sheria na mazoea ya huko hayaruhusu. Ama kweli jiwe la pembeni walilokataa waashi limekuwa bora! Ndiyo maana bara lenye kusifika kwa kubagua waswahili kama Asia sasa linajivunia binti wa kiAfrika kuwa makamu wa rais wa Marekani. Tuonane wiki ijayo.
Chanzo: Nipashe Jumapili kesho.
Friday, 13 November 2020
Thursday, 12 November 2020
The news that former US President Donald Trump has not guts to accept his current loss, thus become a loser is shocking. For more info, PLEASE CLICK HERE.
Wednesday, 11 November 2020
But such ridiculous claims were also made immediately after the 2015 Presidential election, advanced by the “best loser” political party CHADEMA. This was not only a ridiculously false claim, but was also dangerous for country’s the peace and political tranquility; and must therefore be strongly disputed, whenever it happens.
Disputing the false claims of “votes having been stolen”.
Our ‘best loser’ political parties in the past Presidential elections, namely Chama cha Demokrasia na Maendeleo (CHADEMA), and the Civic United Front (CUF) have always ‘invented’ a rather strange explanation for their failures; which was to claim very loudly, that their votes “had been stolen” ! We heard that from CHADEMA’s Presidential candidate Edward Lowassa when he lost in the 2015 Presidential election, which he had confidently assured himself that he was going to win “even before the second (Sunday) Holy Mass was over”. When he actually lost that election, he immediately claimed loudly, that his votes “had been stolen”.
Sir Winston Churchill on the art of politics.
That British Statesman and war-time British Prime Minister, Sir Winston Churchill, is on record as having said the following:- “Politics” is the ability to foretell what will happen tomorrow, or next week, or next year; plus the ability to find an explanation for why it did not happen”.
Such false claims by any losing party, are simply rendered ridiculous by the obvious fact of the transparency of the relevant exercise. This transparency is provided for in our electoral laws and procedures, which make adequate provision for the prevention of any such fraud.
For example, there are provisions in those laws, which allow each political party to appoint its own “polling Agents”, whose functions are clearly specified therein, namely “ to represent and safeguarding the interests of the party’s candidate at the polling station”. The words “safeguarding the party’s interests” obviously include the responsibility to ensure that the votes of that party’s candidate are not stolen. Furthermore, the election laws also provide for the appointment of a “counting agent” by every candidate, to represent him during the counting and addition of votes by the Returning Officer, or by the Electoral Commission, as the case may be.
In the light of these legal provisions, plus the fact that candidates have always appointed their polling and counting agents as required by law; how can anyone manage to “steal votes” in the presence of all these watchful representatives of the candidates themselves ? Thus, my strong message here is that, should any of the “best losers” in this year’s Presidential election be tempted to claim that their votes “have been stolen”; the enlightened public should understand that this is merely the implementation of Sir Winston Churchill ‘s ‘political wisdom’ quoted above; and, therefore, any such misguided claims should just be ignored.
A continuation of the “Magufulification” syndrome.
During his first term as President of the United Republic of Tanzania, John Magufuli has clearly demonstrated his unique personal leadership style, which was characterized by the twin factors of ‘assiduity’, and ‘innovation’. The word “assiduity” describes a person’s habit of working very hard, and making sure that everything is done as well as it can be. This is what adequately explains his invention of the slogan “HAPA KAZI TU”.
Soon after President Magufuli had assumed office, and in the course of my diligent search for suitable materials to be published in this column, I hit upon the idea of putting on record some of President Magufuli’s performance, and ‘miracle’ achievements; through articles published in this column regularly, at the end of every year. These articles are what present some solid evidence of President Magufuli’s twin qualities of ‘assiduity’ and ‘innovation.
The first of such articles was published at the end of his first year in office, on 22nd November, 2016; in which, in relation to the President’s qualities of ‘assiduity’ and ‘innovation’, I did put on record, among other things, his unprecedented action of cancelling the pompous and costly display of huge military parades that have always marked our independence day celebrations on 9th December; and, instead, he ordered that independence day be celebrated by way of everyone undertaking the more important task of cleaning their surrounding environment, wherever they live.
The following year’s article was published on November 2nd, 2017, when President Magufuli had just completed his second year in office; in which I narrated his other demonstrated qualities as “a man of action”, as well as “a man of his word” , who walks his talk. For, he had brought ‘real and substantive change’ during his two years in office, both on the Government side, where he had introduced new tax collection initiatives, resulting in the amounts of money collected through taxes, suddenly rising from the previous billions to the current trillions of shillings.
Another article was published on 1st November, 2018 after he had completed his third year in office. In that article I made a brief review of President Magufuli’s performance in the crucial social and economic sectors, including his effective tax collection drive, which had enabled him to undertake some mega infrastructure development projects and substantial poverty alleviation measures ; effective delivery of goods and services to the people by providing greatly increased facilities for education, health, water and sanitation services; his successful industrialization drive; as well his introduction of ‘sanity’ in the public service.
The final such article was published on 14th November, 2019; under the title “Magufuli’s four legendary successful years”, which was a quotation from an advertisement that had appeared prominently on the front page of the Daily News for several days leading to the 5th day of November, 2019, the fourth anniversary of John Magufuli’s shining Presidency.
What they said.
As expected, many different people did express their varied opinions in assessing President Magufuli’s performance at that stage. That is when a number of innovative academicians, the likes of Kenyan Professor Patrick Lumumba and others, proposed that “President Magufuli’s style of leadership needs to be given a conceptual dress, so that it can be well studied and analyzed, in order to enable others to benefit from it”; and consequently ‘invented’ this new concept, which they baptized in the captivating name of ‘MAGUFULIFICATION”.
And now that, as a result of his sweeping victory in the 2020 Presidential election, President Magufuli will be “armed to the teeth” with the massive peoples’ confidence that was expressed by the super high percentage of votes cast in his favour on 28th October, 2020; plus a Parliament which is ‘full to the brim’ with loyal CCM members, who will be ready and willing to support all his proposals; and also considering his election campaign promises, that he will deliver more surprises if he is re-elected; we can confidently expect a vigorous continuation of his “miracle performance” during his second term. In other words, it will be “Magufulification” continued, and at a much higher level. email@example.com / 0754767576.