Ex-CJ Mutunga’s Miguna gambit

FormerChief Justice Willy Mutunga during an interview with the Sunday Nation in Nairobi on October 22, 2021Jeff Angote | Nation Media Group

              

                                                            Makau Mutua

    Professor at SUNY Buffalo Law School and Chair of the KHRC.

What you need to know:

• I wholeheartedly support ex-Chief Justice Willy Mutunga’s gambit to travel to Toronto and hand-deliver Mr Miguna to JKIA in Nairobi on November 16.
• No one connected to the swearing-in of ODM’s Raila Odinga as the “People’s President” on January 30, 2018 has been subjected to such hellish calumny.

Allow me to state the bottom line upfront. I’ve long held the view that Toronto-based lawyer Miguna Miguna is a disgusting and despicable human being. More on this later. By the same token, he’s a native-born Kenyan whose citizenship is irrevocable by the state. Thus – as the courts have ruled and repeatedly affirmed – Mr Miguna has iron-clad legal and constitutional rights to enter and leave Kenya at will. Nothing, and no one, including the state, should stand in his way at any port of entry.
        That’s why I wholeheartedly support ex-Chief Justice Willy Mutunga’s gambit to travel to Toronto and hand-deliver Mr Miguna to Jomo Kenyatta International Airport in Nairobi on November 16, Anno Domini 2021. My advice: get your popcorn.
        I will not rehash the legal “whys” and “wherefores” for Mr Miguna’s tribulations. That matter is black and white. As pitch black as the darkest night and as bright as the most brilliant Kitui sky. That’s why I will not belabour the point. Suffice it to note no one connected to the swearing-in of ODM’s Raila Odinga as the “People’s President” on January 30, 2018 – including the principal himself – has been subjected to such hellish calumny. Mr Miguna has been singled out for “special treatment” by the state. It is time for that unjustifiable and inexplicable vendetta to end – now. Let the son of the soil return to Nyando and enjoy the hills and valleys of his youth.
        Some people prefer a SOB – English “euphemism” for “nice guy” – inside the tent pissing out than outside the tent pissing in. Mr Miguna is now on the outside pissing in. I have a feeling that as a matter of realpolitik, he’d be harmless – and lose all his teeth in quick succession – were he on the inside pissing out, or in. In Kenya, Mr Miguna would become just another village heckler.
Kenya’s town wag
        Instead, the state has built him up into a figure, albeit a caricature, by preventing him from coming home. The impression is that the state is deathly afraid of Mr Miguna. That’s an unforced error. You keep your friends close, and your enemies even closer. Let the man be.
It’s true that someone should wash Mr Miguna’s mouth with soap. But that should be left to his loved ones, not the state. Mr Miguna is Kenya’s town wag. Let him come home to keep us entertained. And let those who will be aggrieved sue him civilly for defamation.
        Personally, I would never waste a penny suing him because the poor man can’t pay. The Constitution guarantees political speech to the very edge of defamation and sedition. Those are the only guardrails we should watch. Not whether his speech has odium, is offensive, cringeworthy, or embarrassing. What loud people say about others says more about them than their targets. 
The state’s impunity
        Mr Miguna presents as a person who is troubled. If you doubt me, just visit his Twitter and Facebook pages and you will emerge with a giant migraine. He says unspeakable things. He shouts all the time. He’s angry 24/7. He’s the most “righteous” person on Planet Earth. He knows everything. He’s omniscient. He’s a messiah and God’s gift to us earthlings. In other words, he’s an egotist and narcissist par excellence. I don’t know what would help him, but I leave that to the experts. However, I have no doubt that being in Kenya would defang and largely neuter him.
        Dr Mutunga’s gambit to hand-carry Mr Miguna back to Kenya appears to be driven by his fidelity to the rule of law and human rights. He figures that his moral standing and the prestige of his service to Kenya and the world will bend the state to his will and allow Mr Miguna back. He could be right, or woefully wrong. Will the airlines that have been subject of Mr Miguna’s “red alerts” carry him to JKIA? I don’t know, but I doubt it. Dr Mutunga should be prepared to come back empty-handed. But the attempt in itself will speak louder than words and bring more attention to the state’s flagrant disregard for the law and judicial orders.
        I’ve seen some commentary suggesting that Dr Mutunga’s sojourn on Mr Miguna’s behalf is a political stunt meant to burnish his legacy by blotting out the infamous 2013 ruling upholding the presidential election. That’s too cynical and frankly mean-spirited. I know the former Chief Justice more than most. I can speak without equivocation that he’s driven here by his loathing for the state’s impunity. That has been his life’s work.
        So, let’s honour his determination to bring our fellow citizen home. To paraphrase, if not him, who? If not now, when? Freedom survives – and endures – because we protect those we loathe the most, not because we coddle those we love.
Makau Mutua is SUNY Distinguished Professor and Margaret W. Wong Professor at Buffalo Law School. He’s chair of KHRC. @makaumutua

Source: Sunday Nation today

Uya Tinamate Bakomana na Basikana (The Song of the Week)

 

Waraka kwa Rais Kuhusu Viongozi Kuendeshwa

Mheshimiwa Rais, 
Mwanzoni mwa mwaka huu niliandika makala ya kuishauri serikali namna ya kuongeza mapato yake bila kuombaomba na kukopa. Sikwenda mbali zaidi ya kuchambua na kudurusu mfumo wetu wa utawala tuliorithi toka kwa wakoloni; tukaulea na kuuendekeza huku tukiishia kuwa ombaomba na tegemezi bila sababu tena bila kuona hata aibu au kuhisi tuna dhambi ya kujitakia! Kabla ya kuandika waraka huu, niliangaza hapa na pale mitaani niishiko hapa Kanada. Nilijiuliza. Inakuwaje mawaziri, majaji, wakuu mbali wazito tu, wabunge na wengine wengi ambao mishahara yao ni mikubwa ukilinganisha na wa kwetu wanavyoweza kuuhudumia umma bila kuwa tegemezi kama ilivyo nyumbani kwa kodi za wananchi. Nilihoji mantiki ya watendaji wetu kuwa na madereva, walinzi hata wasaidizi kana kwamba hawana akili wala mikono. Je huku siyo kuwageuza wanyonyaji kinyemela hata kama tumefanya hivi tangu tupate uhuru?
        Mheshimiwa Rais, kukumbushia, nagusia suala hili tena ili likufikie na kukufikirisha ili ulifanyie kazi kama ambavyo umefanyia kazi baadhi ya ushauri wangu kama vile kumteua mwanamke kuwa Waziri wa Ulinzi na JKT–––kama itakupendeza japo naamini itakupendeza tu. 
    Mheshimiwa Rais, nakukaribisha na kukuomba tufikiri pamoja. Tukiondoa wewe, Makamu wako na Waziri Mkuu, kweli kuna haja ya wasaidizi wako waliobaki nchi nzima kupewa madereva kana kwamba ni watoto, vikongwe au mataahira wasioweza kuendesha magari yao? Je kabla ya kuteuliwa nani alikuwa anawaendesha wakati wengine hawakuwa na hata na baiskeli? Iweje wazito wa huku tena wanaotimiza majukumu yao bila kuiba, kubangaiza, kubebwa wala kujiingiza kwenye ufisadi wajiendeshe pamoja na kuwa na changamoto ya madai yasiyoisha ya wanaowawakilisha ikilinganiswa na wanaowakilisha matumbo yao japo si wote–––wahudumu vizuri tena bila kunyonya umma wao?
        Mheshimiwa Rais, hata suala la baadhi kufunguliwa milango ya magari yao nalo linatia doa uhuru wetu. Pamoja na kukaa huku kwa muda si haba, sijawahi kuona  mfano, Rais wa taifa jirani jeuri kifedha na kivita la Marekani au Waziri wetu Mkuu akifunguliwa kitabu cha hotuba yake au kuwa na mtu anayesimama nyuma yake utadhani mtu huyo ni ukuta ambao unaweza kuzuia asiumizwe wakati ni binadamu wa kawaida na asiye na uhumuhimu wa kuwa hap? Kama mtu hawezi kujifungulia kabrasha lake la hotuba ina maana hata kuisoma hiyo hatuba anapaswa apewe mtu wa kufanya hivyo. Je ni kweli kuwa hamna uwezo wa kufungua makabrasha na kusoma hotuba zenu au ni kwa vile haya mambo ni mazoea mliyorithi kama sehemu ya madaraka wakati siyo bali mabaki ya ukoloni na njia fichi ya kuwafanya muonekane hamjiamini?
        Mbali na kuendeshwa, wakubwa wetu walio wengi wanapenda kulindwa kama watoto wadogo au wafungwa. Je wanamuogopa nani? Ukiachia wewe Mheshimiwa Rais, Makamu wako na Waziri Mkuu, hawa wengine wana tishio gani la usalama wakati wengi wao wanateuliwa tu? Hivi Spika wa Bunge ana adui gani wakati kazi yake ni kutunga sheria tu? Je wanauhitaji huo ulinzi kiasi cha kupoteza kodi za watanzania maskini au ni makandokando na mbwembwe alizoanzisha mkoloni kwa faida yake na hasara kwetu? Kimsingi, wakoloni walioshika vyeo kama hivyo walilindwa kwa sababu walikuwa ni maadui wa wananchi waliowatesa, kuwanyonya na kuwakandamiza. Hawa walistahiki  ulinzi huu tokana na jinai na ujambazi waliokuwa wakitenda. Je hawa wetu wanamtenda jinai gani kiasi cha kupaswa kulindwa dhidi ya watu wanaowatumikia kama kweli wanawatumikia na si kuwatumia?
        Mheshimiwa Rais, kitu kingine ambacho kinalitia hasara taifa ni ile hali ya kuwapangishia nyumba wazito tena wenye marupurupu na mishahara mikubwa huku wengine wakiwekewa walinzi na watunzaji bustani. Je mishahara yao inafanya kazi gani? Je ni haki kwa watu wa viwango vya chini tena wenye mishahara kiduchu kama vile walimu, waganga, na watendaji wengine wadogo kujilipia nyumba wakati wana mishara na marupurupu kidogo? Je serikali ina utajiri gani wa kuwabeba kiasi hiki? Kwanini wapewe mishahara mikubwa na kulala bure ukiachia mbali kutumia hata magari ya umma kwenda na kurudi maofisini kwao wakati watendaji wa kawaida wa chini na wananchi wanasota kwenye usafiri wa umma? Kwanini  watumishi wenye mishahara mikubwa wasikopeshwe magari watumie badala kutumia ya umma wakati wafanyakazi wengine hawana huduma wala haki hiyo? Licha ya kuhujumu na kusikinisha umma, je kuendelea kuwadekeza watendaji wetu wakubwa siyo kuwafanya wasifikirie ukiachia mbali kuwapendelea na kuwapa fursa ya kuhujumu umma kwa kutumia vibaya mali za umma kwa vile hawana uchungu nazo?
        Mheshimiwa Rais, ukipiga mahesabu ya fedha zinazotumika hovyo kuwalaza, kugharimia usafiri na mambo mengine ambayo si muhimu kama kuwapa walinzi na watunza hata bustani kwa idara na taasisi zote za serikali, utakuta ni mabilioni au matrilioni ya fedha ambayo yangefanya mambo ya msingi kama vile kupambana na umaskini kwa kutoa huduma kwa watu wetu na kuwajengea uwezo. Ni jambo la aibu kwa nchi inayochezea fedha kwenye mambo yasiyo ya msingi kwa kundi dogo la walaji huku ikitegemea kuombaomba na kukopakopa badala ya kubana matumizi na kutumia kidogo ilicho nacho vizuri.
        Mheshimiwa Rais naomba nimalizie kwa kushauri yafuatayo:
Mosi, mtindo wa kuwapa watendaji wa umma  upendeleo na huduma wasizostahiki kama nilivyoonyesha hapo juu ukomeshwe mara moja–––tena si kwa utashi wako bali utungiwe sheria ambayo itafanya kazi hata baada ya wewe kuachia madaraka.
Pili, watumishi wa umma waliorodheshwa hapo pamoja na wengine wote wanaoendeshwa, waanze kuendesha magari yao mara moja. Wasiojua wapelekwe kwenye shule za udereva na wengine watakaoteuliwa mojawapo na masharti iwe ni kujua kuendesha gari.
        Mwisho kabisa, Mheshimiwa Rais, kama utafanyia kazi mawazo, haya–––amini nakuambia–––taifa litapaa ndani ya muda mfupi. Licha ya hiyo, utakuwa umeanzisha kitu kipya chenye kutafsiri maana ya uhuru na kujitegemea kama tulivyotarajia kwa kupigania uhuru tukaishia kukopi kila kitu alichofanya mkoloni ima kwa kujua au bila kujua tusijue tunawakomoa watu wetu na kujenga mazingira ya vurugu huko mbele tuendako. Tuache kuwalemaze wakubwa zetu kwa hasara yetu. Kwa leo ni hayo tu.

Chanzo: Raia Mwema leo.

60 YEARS OF INDEPENDENCE : REFLECTIONS ON NYERERE’s LEGACY.

                   

There  are  many   legacy   aspects   that  can  be  credited  to  Mwalimu  Julius  Nyerere,  the  founder  and  Father  of  our  nation.    However,   his   most   acclaimed   and  everlasting  legacy    is,  undisputedly,  that  of  the  country’s   unity,  tranquility,  and  peace,  among  the  people  of  Tanzania.     “UNITY”  is   the  chemical  substance  that  has  bonded  the  people  of  Tanzania  together  for   all  the  60  years  of  independence.                                                             

        Mwalimu  Nyerere   successfully   forged  this  lasting  unity   through specific   concrete  measures,  which   included   the  nationalization  of  the  previously  segregated  religion-based  schools;   the  construction  of  new   boarding  schools   which  were  to  admit  students  from  different  parts  of  the  country;  and  the  introduction  of  ‘national  Service’  training  camps.  These  measures   helped  to  create  new  friendships  and  alliances   among  the  country’s  youth;  thus  eliminating  any  lingering    tribal  feelings  and   loyalties  among  them.
This   factor  was  acknowledged  by  President  Nyerere  himself,   in  his  farewell  address  to  Parliament  on  29th  July,  1985,  in  preparation  for  his  voluntary  retirement  in  October  of  that  year.   We  will  elaborate  on  this   aspect  a  little  later  in  this  presentation.  In  the  meantime,  we  will  look  at  the  pre-independence  challenges,  and  the  immediate  post-independence   tasks.
‘Nyerere’  and  ‘Uhuru’   are  synonymous.
“Kama  siyo  juhudi  zako  Nyerere,  na   Uhuru  tungepata wapi?”  (Patriotic  song).          

         In  the  context  of  this  article,  the   word   “independence’    means   no  more   than  ‘freedom  from  colonial  domination’.   That  is  to  say,  freedom   from  being  ruled   by   foreign  people,   who  have   an  alien  attitude  to  life,   as  well  as  different  customs  and  beliefs;  and   who   are  entitled   to  determine  the  forms   of   government,  and  the  types   of  social   and  economic  activities  for  the  people  whom   they  dominate ,  without  their  consent.    Thus,   the  primary  role  of the  colonial   government  was   merely   to  “govern”   (read   control)   the  people;   while  paying  minimal  attention  to  those   peoples’   social  and  economic  development  needs.                                     

     Hence,   the  attainment  of  “Independence”,  presented   the  opportunity  for  the  country  to  plan  and  implement   its  own   development ,   precisely   in  accordance  with    its  needs  and  requirements.               

        In  the  words  of  Mwalimu  Nyerere  himself:- “Uhuru  ulitupatia  fursa   ya   kujenga  Taifa   letu  kulingana  na  misingi  ambayo  tumekuwa  tukiihubiri,   yaani   usawa  na  fusa  sawa  kwa  kila  mmoja  wetu   ya  kuchangia  katika  maendeleo  ya  nchi  yetu  kwa  nguvu  zake  zote,  na  uwezo  wake  wote”.

The   formation   of   political  parties.
         Political  parties  were  the  recognized  vehicles  for  use  by  politicians  in  all  colonized   countries   in   the  fight  for  their   independence.   And   Mwalimu   Nyerere  had  to    follow   exactly  the  same  route,   by  establishing  the  Tanganyika  African  National  Union  (TANU),  on  7th  December,  1954.  Before   TANU’s   establishment,  there  were  no  political  parties  in  Tanganyika.    TANU   was  indeed  preceded  by  an  organization  called  Tanganyika  African  Association,   which   was   founded  in  1929;  but  this  was  only  a  welfare  organization,   formed  by  the  few  civil  servants  who  were  employed  by  the  British  colonial  Administration.   Thus,   when  Nyerere  started  his  active  engagement  in  politics,   he    joined   TAA;   and   was subsequently   elected   its   President,   on  17th  July,  1953.                     

        It  was   at  its   annual  general  meeting   held   on  7th  July,  1954,  that  TAA  resolved  to  convert  itself  from  its  previous   status  as  a  welfare  organization,  into  a  political  organization  named  TANU;  whose  mission  was  “to  prepare  the  people  of  Tanganyika  for  self-government;  and  to  work  relentlessly   until  that  objective  is  achieved”.                             

Three   other  political  parties  were  rapidly  formed  during  that  period.                                               They   were  the  following:-                                                                                                    

(i)  The  ‘United  Tanganyika  Party’ (UTP),  which  was  sponsored  by  the  colonial   government,  for  the  purpose  of  challenging   TANU.                                                               

(ii) The  ‘All Muslim  National  Union  of  Tanganyika’;  whose formation  was  encouraged  by  the  colonial  government ,  because its proponents  were  advocating  an  indefinite  delay  to  the  attainment  of  independence;  due  to  their   expressed   fear  that  if  independence  came  too  quickly  as  demanded  by  TANU,  it  would  “mainly  benefit   the  Christians  who  were  better  educated”.      

 (iii)  The  ‘African  National  Congress’  (ANC),  which  was  a   splinter  party  from  TANU.;  just  because   their  declared  policy   was   “Africa  for Africans  only”,  which  was  in  direct  opposition   to   TANU’s   multi-racial  policy.                      

        Inevitably,  there   were  serious   other   challenges  which   were  created by  the  colonial  Administration,  in  an  effort  to  sabotage  TANU’s  efforts  in   its  pursuit  for   the  country’s  independence.     For  example,   an  ‘Executive  Order’  was  issued  in  December  1954,  by   which  all  public  servants  were  prohibited  from  joining  TANU  as  members  thereof.  This  effectively  denied  TANU  the  services  of  the  few  educated  Tanganyika  AfricanFurthermore,  a  new  law  was  enacted,   which  required  the  registration  of  individual  TANU  Branches.  This  gave  the  colonial  Administration  the  means  to  refuse  the  opening  of  new  TANU  Branches,  by  simply  denying  them  registration.   It  also  gave  them  the  power  to  de-register  any  TANU  Branch,  on  the  simple  excuse that  it  had  violated  the  conditions  for  registration.                                                                                                                        

         In  addition,  during   1957,   Nyerere  and  other  TANU  leaders   were  banned  from  holding  public  meetings.

        Then  there  was  the   imposition  of   the  infamous  “tripartite  vote”  under  an  election  law  which  was  enacted  in  May  1957  in  preparation  for  the   first-ever  general  election  of  1958/59.     This  law  required  that  in  order  for  his  vote  to  be  valid,   every  voter  must   vote  for  three  candidates:  a  European,  an  Asian  and  an  African.  Many  TANU  leaders  and  ordinary  members  were ,  understandably,   opposed  to  this  requirement.
The   immediate   post- independence   tasks.
        President  Julius  Nyerere,  who   was  in  charge  of  the  country  during  the  immediate  post-independence     years;  was  faced   with   two  distinct  crucial  tasks   as  a  result  of  the  attainment  of  the  country’s   independence  (or  freedom   from  colonial  domination).                                                     The   first  was  to  ‘remove  all  remnants   of   the   undesirable   colonial   laws  and  governance   structures’,   which  had  been   based  entirely   on  blatant   racial segregation.                                               The  other  was  to  rapidly   ‘put  in  place   new  governance  policies  and  structures’,  that  would  be  suitable  for  the  wellbeing  of  the  people  of  the  new  Tanganyika   nation.              

        The  racial  segregation  policies  were  so  obnoxious  that   they  tempted   some  radical  members  of  the   pre-independence  Legislature,    to  retaliate  by   proposing   a    denial  of  the  country’s  citizenship   to   all  non- Africans.   This  happened   during  the  heated   two-day   debate  (17th -18th  October,  1961) on   the  Second  Reading  of   the   Citizenship  Bill.                     

        The  most  vocal  group  that  was  supporting  this    proposed  denial ,   included   Ali  Said  Mtaki  (Mpwapwa)  and  Christopher  Kasanga  Tumbo (Mpanda).  But  their   view   was  vehemently  opposed   by   Mwalimu   Nyerere,  who  strongly    argued   the   principle  that  the  new  country’s  citizenship  was  going  to  based  only   on   loyalty   to  the  country,  and  certainly    not  on  the  colour   of   a  person’s   skin;   which,  he  pointed  out,    was  just  another  form  of  racial  segregation!

        But,  in  those  early  formative  years,    President  Nyerere  also  found  it  imperative  to  carry  out   certain   other   minor   tasks    which  appeared   necessary    for  the  purpose   of   ‘de-colonizing’  some   peoples’  minds.   These  were  in  respect  of  two  matters  of  a  rather  mundane  nature,   which  were  rapidly  emerging.   These  were:  (a)  the   unnecessary   pomposity   surrounding  government  leaders  and  functions;  and  (b)  the  need  to  exercise  frugality  in  government  spending .    In  connection  therewith,   he    gave   himself  the   task  of  ‘preaching ’  about    the  importance,  and  urgent,  need   to  avoid  such  temptations.      
With  regard  to  ‘pomposity’;   President  Nyerere,    in  his  speech   at  a  mass  rally to   mark  “Saba Saba  Day”   on  7th July,  1963,  spoke  seriously  on  ‘the  dangers  of  pomposity’;   and  followed  this  up  by  issuing  a  terse   letter  to  all  Ministers  and  Officials  of  the  government  and  TANU  dated  13th  July,  1963;  in  which    he  instructed  “every  person  in  a  responsible  position,  both   in  TANU  and  the  Government,   to  help  in  stamping  out  this  disease”.                    

        Specifically,   he   expressed   very  strong  disapproval   of  the  practice  of  ‘singing  the  National  Anthem  every  time  a  government  leader  arrives  at  a  gathering  of  any  kind,  anywhere”;  and  the  closure   by  the  Police  of  streets   and  roads to  other  users,   “hours  before    the  President  is  passes  through”;  a  practice  which  he  condemned    by  saying: “do  not  confuse  dignity   with  pomposity” .  
        And  with  respect   to  ‘frugality’,  President   Nyerere  addressed  this  issue  in  his  formal  ‘Address   to  the  nation’  on  the  first  anniversary  of  the  Union  between  Tanganyika  and  Zanzibar   on  26th  April  1965; in  which  he  emphasized   the  need  for  the  government,  as  well  as  the  individual  citizens;  to  cultivate  the  habit,  and  practice,   of   refusing  to  buy  things   that  are  not  really  necessary,  or  essential,  for  ordinary use;    merely  as  a  sign  of  showing  off. For example,   during  the  first  year  after  independence  (when  Nyerere had  resigned  as  Prime  Minister),  the  government  had   bought  a  fleet  of  specially  designed,   luxury  black  limousines,  for  use  by   Government  Ministers.    
     Nyerere’s   indelible   legacy  of  lasting  unity  and  peace.
In  his  farewell  Address  to  Parliament  referred  to  above,  President  Nyerere  literally   went  ‘down  memory  lane’ ,   by   making  a  candid    assessment  of  his  performance  during   his  period  in  office.    He   said  the  following,  among  many  other  things:- “Kazi  iliyokuwa  muhimu  kuliko  zote  kwangu  mimi,  ilikwa  ni  kujenga  Taifa  lenye  umoja,  kwa  misingi  ya  heshima  na  usawa  wa  binadamu .  .  .  Nadhani  leo naweza  kusema  bila  kusita; kwamba   tulipata  mafanikio  makubwa   na  ya  kujivunia,   katika  juhudi  za   kuifikia    shabaha  hii  kuu  na  ya  msingi  kabisa.  Kwani  sasa  tunalo  Taifa  lenye  umoja,  na  ambalo  msingi  wake  ni  heshima  na  usawa  wa  binadamu.    Kwa  hakika,  tumepiga  hatua  kubwa  katika  kuimarisha  umoja  huo.    Na  sasa  umoja  wetu,    umo ndani  ya  wananchi  wa  Tanzania  wenyewe”.                    

    The   fact  that  ‘umoja  wetu  umo  ndani  ya  wananchi  wenyewe’,  is  exemplified  by    cultural  habits  which  have  naturally   developed  among  the  people  of  Tanzania,  specifically  that  of  inter-tribal  marriages;    which  has  been  greatly  aided  by  the  Kiswahili   common  language.    Indeed,   inter-tribal  intermarriages   are  now  a  pretty  common  feature  of  Tanzanian  society.   And  as  a  result  of  such  marriages,  even  the  tribal  dialects  are  getting  lost  and  forgotten;  because   the   common   language  of  communication   in   such  families  unavoidably  becomes Kiswahili,  the  national  language.        
    President  Nyerere  went  on  to  enumerate  all  the  achievements  that  had  been  scored  during  the  whole  of  that period.  (For  more  deails,  see  my  book  titled :  “Uongozi  na  Utawala  wa  Mwalimu  Julius  Kambarage  Nyerere”  (Nyambari  Nyangwine  Publishers,  Dar es Salaam, 2012). There  can  be  no  disputing  the  fact   that   It  is   this  national  unity,   which  has  guaranteed  the  long  lasting  peace  that  our  country  has  enjoyed,   throughout  the  60  years   period  under  discussion. 
      Mwalimu  Nyerere’s  other  legacy  aspects. These   include  that  of  his   exemplary   ethical  leadership.  For  example,  in  the  course  of  his tough   journey   in  the  fight  for  independence,  the  colonial  Governor  nominated  Mwalimu  Nyerere  to  the  membership  of   the
  Legislative   Council  (LEGCO),   in  July  1957.   Mwalimu  Nyerere  had  gladly  accepted  this,  in  the  hope  that  such   membership    would  help  him  to  influence  the  course  of  events  through   his   participation  therein.    But  he  felt  obliged  to  resign  there from   only  six  months  later,  due  to   his  utter  frustration  at  being  unable  to  influence  events   as  he  had  hoped;    just  because  the  colonial  government  would  not  listen  to   any  of   his   reasonable   proposals.                                           He   explained   the  reasons   for  his  resignation  as  follows: - “Nilijitahidi  kutoa  mchango  wangu  ambao  ulikuwa  katika  uwezo  wangu  kutoa,  lakini   kila nilichokipendekeza,  kimekuwa  kinakataliwa. Najisikia  kuwa  ninawadanganya  Watanganyika,   kama  nitaendelea  kuwa  mjumbe  wa  Baraza  hilo  nikipokea  posho ,  na  hivyo    kutoa  muonekano   wa  udanganyife  kwamba  kuna  kazi  ya  maana  ninayoifanya huko,  wakati  kumbe  sina  manufaa  yoyote  yenye  kuleta   faida  kwa  nchi  yangu” !
piomsekwa  @gmail.com   /  o754767576. 

Source: Daily News today

 

Barua ya Wazi kwa Rais Samia Kuhusu Kesi za Kubambikiza

Mheshimiwa Rais, kwanza nakusalimu kwa JMT.
Niliwahi kusikia ukiwaasa polisi kuacha kubambikia watu kesi. Nakumbuka ulitoa kauli hii Machi 28, 2021 ulisema “hapa kuna kesi tunazoshindwa na hizi hazikuwa na misingi mizuri au zilikuwa za kubambikizwa yote yapo haya! Kwa hiyo nakuomba Mkurugenzi zile ambazo huna misingi mizito ya kuweza kushinda zifute kabla hujazipeleka huko kila siku kusema kuna kesi tumeshindwa hazina tija kwa Serikali.” Je mfano Kesi inayomkabili Mwanasiasa fulani wa upinzani–––ambaye siwezi kutaja jina lake kwa vile kesi iko mahakamani–––ina maslahi gani kwa taifa? Mwandishi wa makala hii ni msomi na mtaalamu wa masuala ya ugaidi. Kimsingi, kesi nyingi zinazoitwa za ugaidi si za ugaidi bali ukandamizaji wa kukomoa maadui. Rejea namna Marais wa zamani wa Iraq Saddam Hussein na wa Libya, Muamar Gadaffi walivyozushiwa kesi za ugaidi na mataifa ya magharibi ili kuwakomoa na kuuawa na hatimaye kukutikana kuwa madai yote hayakuwa na ukweli. Kwa tuliosemea ugaidi, hakuna watenda ugaidi wakubwa kama serikali. Mheshimiwa Rais, nisingependa serikali yako iwe mojawapo ya serikali gaidi kama zilivyo serikali nyingi za magharibi.
            Mbali na kesi za kigaidi za kubambikiziwa hapo juu, mfano wa karibu ni wa Rais wa sasa wa Zambia, Mheshimiwa Hichilema Hakainde aliyezushiwa kila aina ya kesi. Sasa ni Rais na wale waliomfanyia unyama huu hawa amani, usingizi wala uhakika wa kesho yao kama atalipiza kisasi. Hawa wanaosingiziwa na kubambikiwa kesi leo wanaweza kuwa Marais wenu. Kwani,  mambo yajayo binadamu hatuyajui. Kwa unyenyekevu nakuomba Mheshimiwa Rais hapa busara itumike.
            Kuambikiana kesi ni jambo hatari si kwa wabambikiwa bali hata taifa hasa ikizingatiwa kuwa linaumiza watu binafsi na taifa bila sababu. Licha ya kuwa jinai ni aina nyingine ya ufisadi wa kimfumo. Hivi familia ya mwanasiasa huyu inajisikiaje kwa mateso inayopata? Kumbuka naye ana mke au mume na watoto na mambo ya kufanya kwake binafsi na taifa kama wewe na mimi. Je hawa waliomfungulia kesi husika walishajiuliza ingekuwa wao wangetaka watendeweje? Je wanayajua ya kesho? Mfano mzuri, nani alijua kuwa wewe Mheshimiwa Rais ungekuwa Rais tena bila kumuumiza yeyote wala kukisumbua chama chako? Je nani anaweza kusimamisha mkono na utashi wa Mungu? Je ni makosa kusema kuwa wewe ni Rais kwa kudra za Mwenyezi Mungu kama ulivyowahi kukiri jambo ambalo laweza kumtokea yeyote hata hawa wanaobambikiziwa kesi za ajabu ajabu? 

        Binafsi si mtetezi wa yeyote hasa ikizingatiwa kuwa niliwahi kuwa mchambuzi wa magazeti ya mmoja wa waathirika wanotuhumiwa ugaidi na kudhulumiwa ujira wangu halali. Hata hivyo, kama binadamu na mtanzania yeyote, anapaswa kutendewa haki sawa na wengine.
        Wenzetu wenye kuchelea ya kesho hutumia njia laini kuwatuliza marafiki zao. Mfano, huwateua wapinzani wao Ubunge. Kwa wale wanaoukataa baada ya kuwasiliana nao ili isiwe aibu baada ya kuwasiliana nao, huwateua wenzao. Wahenga wanasema kuwa hakuna haja kumuua adui yako kwa sumu wakati unaweza kutumia asali. Kuna haja gani ya kumsukuma aliyechutama wakati anakaribia kuanguka? Kuna haja gani kumuogopa mtu au mnyama asiye hatari kwako wakati ukiwakumbatia walio hatari kuliko yeye wanaong’ata na kupuliza kuliko yeye anayelalamika tokana na hasira na kukata tamaa?
        Kuna mambo mengi na hasa kashfa za ufisadi na wizi wa mabilioni ya umma ambazo hazijashughulikiwa. Hata hawa polisi wanaohadaa umma kwa kumfungulia mashtaka hawana ubavu au utashi wa kuwashughulikia mafisadi na mafisi wanaojulikana tokana na waliowawezesha kutenda jinai hii.  Imeishia wapi kesi ya Lugumi? Nini kimetokea kwenye kashfa ya IPTL ambayo walioiasisi wamewahi hata kuwa wakubwa tu?
        Mheshimiwa Rais chunga sana wabaya wasikutumie na kukuchafua kukutumia kuficha, kupuuzia au kusafisha uchafu wao. Una mamlaka na sababu vya kutosha kuwakatilia hata kuwakamata na kuwashughulikia. Mtangulizi wako alikataa–––au tuseme–––aligwaya kufukua makaburi kutokana na alivyojuana nao au kuangalia hatari ambayo wangeusababishia utawala wake. Wewe hukuwa kwenye kundi lao. Mfano, kashfa za uuzaji wa nyumba za umma hukuhusika wala kashfa yoyote. Hivyo, una fursa nzuri ya kupambana na ufisadi na kuendelea kuwavutia watanzania kuwaongoza hata baada ya kumaliza ngwe yako. Nisingependa uwe Rais awa awamu moja. Mtangulizi wako amekuwa Rais wa awamu moja tokana na maamuzi ya Mungu ila si maamuzi ya wananchi. Kwani alikufa akiwa anaanza ngwe ya mwisho ya awamu yake. Una kila kitu cha, nafasi na sifa ya kuwa Rais wa vipindi viwili kama wengine kama utahiari na kuamua kuanza akulifanyia kazi hili kisayansi na si kisiasa tu. You have what it takes and the opportunities to do so.
            Mheshimiwa Rais, naomba niishie hapa kwa kukuomba kuangalia haki ilivyo bila kujali aliyeko upande wa pili. Tumejifunza mengi tokana na baadhi ya dhuluma. Binadamu ana nini ni nani au nini hata angekuwa nani? Licha ya kuwa mama, mke na mwanadamu aliyejaliwa ujuzi na uchungu wa ubinadamu kama mama mwenye kujua uchungu wa uzazi, kama Rais, nakuomba na kukushauri uwe msuluhishi na mwenye kufanya wanyonge wajisikie salama kwako. Hakuna siri iliyomfanya mtangulizi wako kipenzi cha watu cha kweli kama kuwajali wanyonge. Kwa leo sina mengi zaidi ya kukutakia afya njema, amani na ufanisi bila kusahau usikivu katika kazi yako adhimu ya ujenzi na uongozi wa taifa letu.

Chanzo: Raia Mwema leo.

WHO'LL OVERTHROW AND FINISH ANOTHER BETWEEN BURHAN AND HEMERTI IN NORTH SUDAN?

 

For those who remember what happened in North Sudan after the army booted out its long time dictator Omar Bashir and what later happened in Mali where its strong-boy Assimi Goita, will agree with us that soon there'll be another coup d'etat in North Sudan. This time, the man behind the curtain, namely the former head of Janjaweed and self-appointed Lieutenant General Mohamed Hamdan Daqlo aka Hemerti will dispose the current strongman Gen Abdel Fattah Burhan if not him being cut to size. You can take this to the bank. Sudan will settle after the two protagonists finish each other or being finished by the demonstrators. 

        The two would like to avoid being delivered to The Hague to face charges related with genocide they committed in Darfur under Bashir regime. Secondly, the duo is not likely to share power. One needs to–––and must–––finish another for another to prevail and survive. And chances are that the latter is likely to finish the former or vice versa. The duo can be pushed out shall the demonstrators stand their ground. Apart from that, the economic tanking provides a very good impetus and reason for deposing and disposing the couple in power under the marriage of convenience.

        As the de facto ruler, Burhan has what it take to finish depending on how he'll play his cards since he has power without the number in the military machinery. Daqlo has the number in the army though he isn't on the seat of power.

            More importantly, the duo are not a good  couple. They are united by their struggle for survival. No love or need exist between the duo. Any of the couple can finish another shall an opportunity avail itself for any of the two.  Burhan is unsafe in bed with Daqlo and vice versa. Any of the couple would like to see another gone shall he get and seize the moment. Actually, what's on going's nothing but the dance between two inimical evils. Time'll accurately soon tell and show that this prediction won't come to pass.

Omtatah, the people’s advocate

         By Makau Mutua

Professor at SUNY Buffalo Law School and Chair of the KHRC.
What you need to know:
Mr Omtatah has sued the state and its agencies for every injustice he deems a trampling of basic constitutional or human rights.
It’s a miracle how he manages to draft the suit papers largely by himself although he’s owned up to help from several lawyers.
    There’s only one Okiya Okoiti Omtatah – uno. Even the name itself is remarkable. Not because you can simply call him Triple O, or Triple Zero because there are many of those – but because it simply sounds both unique and peculiar.
        Everything about Mr Omtatah stands out. His sing-song diction sets him apart, as do his deportment and general presentation. His exterior is rumpled, but his essence is determined and well defined. He knows what he wants, and how to get it. Most outstanding of all, he’s outdone every lawyer and institution in Kenya by carving out a perch atop the country’s public litigation universe. He’s Kenya’s most effective and prolific public interest litigator. Let’s call him Kenya’s Public Interest Litigator.
        There are people who are born with the knack, if not the gene, for the extraordinary, or paranormal. Mr Omtatah is one of those – a freak of nature, like Mother Theresa. One wonders why such souls do what they do. Perhaps it’s an inner torment that drives them to works of charity, or a self-denying altruism. An inner demon, or angel, that compels them to do good works. Perhaps they would’ve been irredeemable scoundrels, or been victims of a criminal pathology, without their vocation, or calling. They are priests, or shepherds, or fellow men and women. Their reward on earth is pounding the pavement for the benefit of others. Whatever it is, Mr Omtatah is an enigma. 
        If I was to guess, I would say Mr Omtatah didn’t come from great wealth. He may, in fact, have come from a life of penury, which may explain his attraction to the underdog. The man from Teso South apparently declined admission to the University of Nairobi to pursue a Bachelor of Commerce, and make a tonne of money. Instead, like a lamb of the lord, he went to study philosophy and theology at St Augustine Philosophical School. That path isn’t paved with material gold. Quite the opposite. But he pursued another vocation – as the people’s watchman in the corridors of justice. He became a human rights crusader par excellence. He lives in the precincts of the courts.
The people’s advocate
        Mr Omtatah has publicly disclosed that he launched his “legal” career after a conversation with lawyer Kibe Mungai, my one-time fellow traveller at the Task Force on the Establishment of the Truth, Justice, and Reconciliation Commission. Mr Kibe is an intense young lawyer from a hardscrabble pedigree. I could tell then – in 2003 – that he would make a name for himself. What I didn’t know was that he would inspire an icon. But it was Mr Mungai who advised Mr Omtatah to stop wasting his time petitioning Parliament – viewed by many Kenyans as a House of Crooks – and instead go directly to the courts to vindicate the people’s rights. That’s exactly what Mr Omtatah did. He hasn’t looked back.
        As if he was possessed, Mr Omtatah decided to litigate – by suing the state and its agencies – for every injustice he deemed a trampling of basic constitutional or human rights. Among his more celebrated suits have been to stop MPs giving themselves hefty backdated pay raises, stopping the state from increasing fuel taxes to sinful rates, suing to get back grabbed public lands, and pushing back against state snooping – and voyeurism – on private phone conversations. The list stretches from the lake to the sea. Every time I look up, Mr Omtatah has sued the state for something. It’s a miracle how he manages to draft the suit papers largely by himself although he’s owned up to help from several lawyers.
        There are a number of key NGOs that engage in public interest litigation. Katiba Institute, which is associated with Prof Yash Ghai and Prof Jill Ghai, and lawyer Waikwa Wanyoike, has done its share. So have the Kenya Human Rights Commission, Fida, Kituo Cha Sheria, and others. But even among this elite group, Mr Omtatah stands out. He’s indefatigable. The shock of it all is that Mr Omtatah has never seen the inside of a law school and doesn’t have any legal training, or qualification, as a lawyer. He’s literally a “street lawyer”. He reads the Constitution and Kenya’s laws and seeks to implement them with the understanding of a simple citizen. He stands “tall” even among lawyers.
        I know questions have been raised about Mr Omtatah’s sources of financial support. Critics wonder if he’s a gun for hire. In my mind that’s not a negative distinction, or a scarlet letter, because the majority of lawyers are guns for hire. He’s done more public good than most lawyers. I hope he gets paid by somebody for his service to the country. But even more importantly, I hope the state and Kenyans will honour this man while he’s still with us. He should be feted as a national social justice treasure. He, the people’s advocate, more than others, deserves those public commendations the state hands out to flunkies every year.
Makau Mutua is SUNY Distinguished Professor and Margaret W. Wong Professor at Buffalo Law School. He’s chair of KHRC. @makaumutua

Source: Sunday Nation.

Barua kwa Prof Assad, CAG Mstaafu

Kaka, Salamu wa Jina la JMT,
Juzi nilisoma sehemu ukilalamika kuwa unachukia kuitwa Mkaguzi na Mdhibiti Mkuu wa Fedha za Serikali (CAG). Kwanza nilishangaa na pia kusikitika kutokana na hoja dhaifu ulizotoa kuhusiana na kutokupenda kuitwa CAG mstaafu, Mussa Assad. Kaka, shukuru huitwi fisadi wala mwizi. Hata hivyo, ngoja niulize. Kaka, hivi unaelewaje dhana nzima ya kustaafu? Kwangu, kustaafu kunatokana na kufikia ukomo wa kufanya kazi fulani ima kwa kutaka au kulazimishwa ima na umri au mamlaka zinazohusika na uteuzi au uajiri au sheria ya ajira. Je wewe imekuwaje siyo CAG mstaafu wakati kama unavyokaririwa ukisema “sipendi sana kusikia neno mstaafu na kwamba neno hilo linaniudhi linapotamkwa mbele yangu” (Mwananchi, Oktoba 6, 2021)? Kwanza, pole sana kaka kwa hili japo unapaswa ujibu swali hilo hapo juu–––tena kwa usahihi. Je wewe imekuwaje ukaitwa CAG mstaafu? Mwandishi aliandika kuwa hupendi kuitwa mstaafu kwa vile hukondolewa kwa kufuata utaratibu na katiba kutosimamiwa bila kutoa ufafanuzi. Je ya kweli haya? Ni utaratibu huu ambao hukuwa tayari kuuelezea wala kuufafanua kwa faida yetu wasomaji pia tusiojua suala zima kitaaluma? Je katiba ilivurugwa vipi na vifungu vipi na nani na kwa nini ili iwe nini? Je kwanini hukupeleka malalamiko haya mbele ya vyombo husika? Je kuna kitu kinafichwa hapa? Je katika kulalamika umeishaona dalili za kupata au kutendewa haki?
Kaka, kitendo chako kina nia njema japo, kwa wengine kinaweza kuonekana kama kitu cha aibu na shaka hasa ikizingatiwa kuwa aliyetengua nafasi yako ni Rais kwa mamlaka yale yale aliyo nayo kukuteua na kutengua uteuzi wako. Hata kama kama uliteuliwa na Rais mstaafu Jakaya Kikwete na uteuzi wako kutenguliwa na Rais Hayati Dkt John Magufuli, bado huna hoja kiakili na kisheria kutoa madai unayotoa sasa. Je natoa madai haya tokana na kwamba aliyetengua uteuzi wako hawezi kuja kujieleza au kueleza kwanini alifanya hivyo hata kama sheria hailazimishi hili kufanyika hata kama angekuwa hai?
Kaka, unadai kuwa uliondolewa baada ya kutoelewana na Spika wa Bunge Mhe. Job Ndugai. Je una ushahidi kuwa mgogoro huu na Bunge ndio ulipelekea kutenguliwa uteuzi wako? Je kwa maoni na ujuzi wako, yupi alikuwa sahihi na yupi alikosea? Je kama unao, kwanini usilifikishe Bunge kwenye vyombo vya kutoa haki au kutaka Ndugai awajibishwe kama siyo taasisi anayoongoza? Hivi kaka ulipodai kuwa Bunge ni dhaifu bila kutoa maelezo na ushahidi, ulitaka lifanye nini zaidi ya kuonyesha kuwa siyo dhaifu kwa kukushughulikia–––kama kweli ndilo lililofanya Rais akuteme kama njia ya kukuonyesha kuwa lina nguvu? Unadai ulisema kuwa Bunge likukuwa dhaifu. Je hili lilikuwa sehemu ya kazi yako au ulipitiwa, kughafirika au kuudhika?
Kaka, sina nia ya kukulaumu bali kukushauri. Kwanza, ningekushauri–––kama kweli unahisi umeonewa–––fuata taratibu badala ya kulalamika kwenye majukwaa. Hayawezi kukusaidia. Pili, nashauri ujinyamazie. Kwani, kuendelea kulalamikia maamuzi yaliyopitishwa na Hayati ni kujiweka kwenye kundi la mazandiki na wasaliti wasio na aibu wala utu hadi kuwasaliti hata wafu. Mfano mzuri ni ile hali ya kujitokeza baadhi ya wenzetu waliokuwa karibu na Hayati Magufuli kumgeuka na kumuonyesha kama alikuwa kiongozi asiyefaa wakati walikuwa na mud na nafasi ya kumshauri lakini hawakufanya hivyo tokana na ima woga au unafiki.
Wachumia tumbo, wanafiki na wasaka ngawira hawa, kwa sasa, wanajikomba kwa Rais Samia Suluhu Hassan kiasi cha kusahau kuwa alikuwa Msaidizi mkuu wa yule wanayemtuhumu na kumsaliti. Wanasahau kuwa Rais anajua fika kuwa naye wanaweza kumgeuka na kumsaliti; kama walivyomfanyia aliyemwezesha kufika hapo alipo. Kuna watu waliojifanya maswahiba na wasiri wa Hayati Magufuli ambao sasa wamemgeuka kiasi cha kufanya kila anayewajua kuwadharau na kuwachukia. Wanamponda Magufuli wakijifanya wanapenda Samia. Wapo ambao bado wamo serikalini na waliostaafu wanaomng’ong'a wakati ndiyo walikuwa wakimshangilia kwa kila alichofanya. Nadhani Rais anawajua kiasi cha kuwanyamazia na kuwachukulia tahadhali kwani utapofika ukomo wa mamlaka yake hawatamwacha.
Kaka, nakuheshimu sana kama mwana taaluma mwenzangu. Nisingependa uwe katika  kundi la wachumia tumbo au walalamishi wakati kuna njia za kisheria za kudai haki yako–––kama kweli zilikiukwa. Mfano, huyu Rais aliyepo madarakani alikuwa msaidizi mkuu wa mamlaka iliyotengua uteuzi wako. Hivyo, anajua kila kitu. Na kama kungekuwa na namna, asingengoja uanze kulalamikalalamika kiasi hiki. Isitoshe, wewe kama Prof, bado unaweza kurudi darasani na kupiga chaki na mambo yakaenda. Wewe siyo mwanasiasa ambaye ulaji wake hutegemea hisani ya wapiga kura au wenye kuteua.
Kaka, leo sisemi mengi. Naomba nimalize waraka huu kwa kukuomba ulinde heshima ya taaluma. Nisingependa uwe kama yule mwenzetu aliyeteuliwa uwaziri akachanganyika na kupayuka kuwa alitolewa jalalani wakati aliteuliwa tokana na usomi wake ambao–––kwa ujinga na njaa yake–––alishindwa kuutukuza akaishia kuuita jalala. Hata hivyo, simlaumu sana mwenzetu. Kwani, unaweza kusoma sana bila kuelimika na kuelimika bila kusoma sana. Isitoshe busara haifundishwi darasani bali hutokana na umakini wa mhusika katika kuyachunguza maisha na malimwengu na kujifunza. Nani alijua kuwa Hayati Shehe Abeid Aman Karume angejenga majengo ya Michenzani na kutoa huduma bora vilivyowashinda Madaktari wa Falsafa?
Hivyo, kaka, tulia ule pensheni yako na kuachana na malalamiko ambayo hayawezi kubadili kitu. Ushauri wa mwisho ni kwamba–––kama unaamini katika Mungu–––hakuna aliyedhulumiwa akakoswa kulipwa haki na stahiki yake na yule yule mwenye kujua na na kutoa haki. 

Chanzo: Raia Mwema leo.

RIP SIMIAN MUGARUKA

 Even if you were alive, you won't have understood what I have written here
Even if you were there, you would not hear what is said here
You're a simian who knows not the lingua human use
Again, I have been touched by your demise
RIP Mugaruka the simian
Dear Mugaruka of the Kahuzi Biega
The world came to know you as an icon of the Kahuzi Biega
Now that you are gone, we all remember how you towered over the Kahuzi Biega
RIP simian mugaruka.
For more info please CLICK HERE

THE 60 YEARS OF INDEPENDENCE (3) : THE MOST SIGNIFICANT POLITICAL ACHIEVEMENTS.

In  last  week’s  article,  we  commenced   discussion  on   ‘the  two  most  significant  political  achievements’  that  were  secured  during    this  60  years   post-independence  period,  namely ,      (I)  the  Union  between  Tanganyika  and  Zanzibar  in  April  1964;  and  (ii)   the  ‘transition  to  multi-party  politics’  in  July  1992;  and  took  a  closer  look  at  the  1964  Union  between  Tanganyika  and  Zanzibar.  In    today’s  article,  we  will  focus   on  the  second  of  those  events,   that  of   ‘the  transition  to  multi-party  politics’   in  1992. 
The  transition  to  multi-party  politics  was,  no  doubt,  a  major  and  fundamental  political   development .   I  was  an  eyewitness  to  this  transition,  and  my  description  of  this  event  is  as  shown  in  the  paragraphs  which  follow  below.
The  motivating  factors.
This  event  was  motivated   primarily   by  the  political  events  which  occurred  in  the  countries  of  Eastern  Europe  during  the  year   1989;  where,  quite  unexpectedly,   great  and  fundamental  changes  suddenly  took  place   leading  to  the  downfall  of  nearly  all  of  the  communist  parties,    in  those  countries.   This   was  accompanied   by  loud  demands  for  the  introduction  of   ‘democracy  based   on  multi-party  politics’;   and  other  basic  rights  which  were,   apparently,   previously  denied   to  the  majority  of  their  people.                            

        The   demands    for  the  introduction  of  multi-party   politics   quickly  spread  to  several  African  countries,  causing  violence;    and,  in  some  cases, even  the  loss  of  life. This  is  precisely   what  made  it  necessary   for  those  African  countries   that  were  operating  the  ‘one  party’  political  system,   including   Tanzania;    to  start  giving  serious  consideration  to  the  possibility  of  abandoning  that  system,  and  transferring  to  the  multi-party system. In  Tanzania’s    case,  this  was the  agenda   set  for  consideration  at  a  regular   meeting  of  the  CCM  National  Executive  Committee,  which  was  held  in  mid-February,  1991. This   meeting  made  a  careful  review  of  the  state  of  politics  in  the  world  generally   that  had  been  created  by  the  events  taking  place  in  Eastern  Europe,  and  ultimately  resolved   as  follows:-   (a)   That   considering  the  circumstances  then  obtaining  in  the  global  political  environment;    a  national  debate be  initiated   which  will  take  place  through  the  country,  to  discuss   whether,   or  not,  our  country  should  change  to   the  multi-party  political  system;  and                 

 (b)  It   authorized  the  President  to  appoint  a  Presidential  Commission,  which  will  coordinate  the  said   discussions;    and,  in  due  course,  present  a  report  of  its  findings. The  Commission  was  established,  without  delay,   on  27th  February  1991President   Mwinyi   appointed  me  to  be  a  member  of  that  Commission.,  which  was  established ,  without  delay,    on   27th  February,  1991,  and  was  given  one  year   within  which  to  complete  its  assignment.               

                I  had  the  good  fortune  of  being  appointed  a  member  of  that  Commission;  which  completed   its  work within  the  specified  period   and  submitted  its  Report  to  President  Mwinyi;    who,  in  turn,  submitted  it  the  party  decision  making  organs  for consideration. It  showed  that   80%  of  all  the  people  who  had  expressed  their  views  had  said  “no”  to  such  change,  with   only  20%  being  in  favour.                   
        However,   despite    this  overwhelming   rejection,  the  Commission  unanimously  recommended  that  the  change  to  multi-party  politics  should   nevertheless   be  implemented. And  the top  organs  of  the   Ruling  party   accepted   this  recommendation;   and,  consequently,  directed  the  Union  and  Zanzibar   Governments to  take  the  necessary  Legislative  measures  to  effect  this  fundamental  change.   And  on  30th  April,  1992,  the  Government   duly   introduced  in the  National  Assembly   “ A  Bill  for  the  8th  amendment  of  the  Constitution”;  which  was  debated  for  a  whole  week,  and   passed  on  7th  May,  1992.  The  8th  Constitutional   Amendment  took  effect    from  1st  July,  1992.
Defining   “ democracy”.
        The  Longman  Dictionary  of  Contemporary  English  Dictionary  defines  the  word  “Democracy”  as  follows:-                                                                                               

 *government  by  the  people,  or  by  their  elected  representatives.                                        

  * a   country   governed   by   its  people  or  their  elected  representatives.                                  

* Social  equality  and  the  right  to  take  part  in  decision  making”. This  definition   gives  us  two  types  of  democracy,  namely:

  (a)  Direct  democracy;    and                                                                                            

 (b)  Representative  democracy.                                                                                    

        Under  the  system  of  direct  democracy,   the  business  of  government  is  carried  out  directly  by  the  people  themselves.    Indeed,  this  is  what  is   currently   being  practiced  in  Tanzania  at  the  Local  Authority   Village   level;    wherein   every  registered  village  has  a  statutory  organ  known   the ‘ Village  Assembly’,  which  consists  of  all  adult  residents  of  the  relevant  village.  The  duties  and  functions  of  the  Village  Assembly  are  provided  as  follows  in  the  relevant  law : Village  Assembly  is  the  supreme  authority  on  all  matters  of  general  policy  in  relation  to  the  affairs  of  the  village  as  such;   and  shall  be  responsible  for  the  election  of  the  Village  Council,  and  for  the  performance  of  any  other  functions  conferred  upon  it  by  or  under  this  Act,  or  any  other  written  law”.   (The  Village  Council  is  defined   therein    as  “the  government  of  the  village;  which  is  vested  with  all  executive  power  in  respect  of  all the  affairs  and  business  of  the  village"). 

         Representative   democracy   is  practiced  at  the  national  level;  whereby   all  the  adult  citizens  of Tanzania  are  entitled  to  elect  their  representatives  to  Parliament  (Wabunge),  and  to  their   respective  Local  Council  Authorities  (Madiwani).    These  elected  representatives  are  mandated  by  law  to  make  the  relevant   decisions  on  the  peoples’   behalf.
An   overview  of  Tanzania’s   democracy   performance. 
The  form  of  democracy  that  a  country  will  operate,  is  usually  given  expression  in   that  country’s    Constitution.    In   the  case  of  Tanzania,  the  Constitution  that  was  in  operation  during     the  early  post-independence  years  ( 1961 – 1965)  was  a  multi-parry  constitution.  This  was  followed  by   the  “One-party”   Constitution (1965 – 1992);  and  then  back  again  to  the  multi-party  Constitution  (1992 -  date).   Thus,  we   have  witnessed    both  types  of  democracy   at  work.  
         It  has  been  said  that  the  good  fortune  of  a  nation  depends   on   how  its  Constitution   is  made  to  work”.    In  the  context  of  this  article,   this   statement   actually   draws   attention  to  the  relevance  of   the  human   factor  involved  in  the  business  of  governance.   Whereas   an  ethical  ruler  will  always  observe  the  intention  of  the  Constitutional    provisions;   an  unethical  ruler  will  tend  to  ignore,  or  disregard,  or  even   to  misconstrue   this   intention,   merely   in  order  to  suit  his  selfish purposes.    And  there  is  abundant   evidence   of  such  unethical  rulers,  both   past  and  present,   in  different  parts  of  the  world.  
The  operation   of   the  one-party  constitution.    
It  was  our  great  good  fortune  that  the   foundations  for  operating  the  ‘One-party’  constitution  were  firmly   laid   by  President  Nyerere;   who  made  sure  that   this  constitution  was   implemented  strictly  in  accordance  with   its  original   intention   and  its  underlying   spirit.  In  such  circumstances,   the  country  encountered  no  serious  political   problems  in  that  respect. This  is  because   Mwalimu   Nyerere  was  “ a  man  of  principle,  intelligence,  and  integrity”.   He   always   insisted   on   the   need   for   leaders   to   observe   the   prescribed   ‘leadership  ethics’,  which   he  himself   observed   very   strictly.   Thus,  in  view  of  these  personal  qualities,  President  Nyerere  was   demonstrably   able  to  operate  the  ‘one-party’  constitution  strictly  in  accordance  with   the  established   ‘principles  of  democracy’;  which  he  himself  had  ensured   that  they  were  enshrined  in  the  said    constitution.   (as  detailed  in  my  book  titled  “Fifty  Years  of  Independence : A  Concise  Political  History  of Tanzania”     (Nyambari  Nyangwine  Publishers,  Dar es Salaam, 2013;   pp,48 -  50).
The  pre-independence   multi-party  constitution.
The  operation  of  the  multi-party  constitution  prior  to  the  attainment  of  independence  turned  out  to  be   problematic;   in  the  sense  that  (in  the  peculiar  circumstances  of  that  period),  it     unexpectedly   created  a   serious   ‘democracy  deficit’ ;   whereby    the  ‘freedom  of  the  people  to  choose  their  representative  to  the  Legislature’  was   inadvertently   curtailed;  due  to  the  voters  being   disenfranchised   as  a  result  of  TANU  parliamentary candidates  being  ‘returned  unopposed’   in  the  majority  of  constituencies.                 

          This  is  precisely   what  prompted  Mwalimu  Nyerere  to  decide  on  the  fundamental    change  of  the  constitution   to   the   ‘one-party’  system;   and   which  he  implemented   very  soon  after  independence.    The  new   constitution  was  enacted  in  July  1965; and   lasted  until  1992,  when  the  return  to  multi-party  politics  was  effected.
The   operation  of   the ‘ second  phase’  multi-party  constitution.
Looking   at  strictly  from  the  point  of  view  of  the  Dictionary   definition  of  “democracy”  quoted   above;  the  operation  of  the  ‘second  phase’   multi-party  constitution  has  also  been  totally  successful,   more   specifically,  in  respect  of  electoral  democracy;    due  to    the  fact  that  our  country  is,   indeed,   “governed  by  the  people  (at  the  Local  Authority  level),   or  by  its  elected  representatives (at  the  national  level);   and  the  opportunity  for  the  people  to  elect  their  representatives  has  always   been  granted  to  them,  without  fail,  every  five  years  throughout  the  period  under  discussion.
However,  there  have  been  other  factors  which  have  proved  to   be  obstacles  to   the  smooth  operation  of  this  system,  not only  in  Tanzania,  but  in  practically  all  other   non- Western    countries   around  the  world;   and  this  factor  is   the  lack  of  the  requisite  multi-party  political  culture.                                                                                                                         

      I  have  discussed  this  factor  at  greater  length  in  my  other  book  titled  “Reflections  on the  First  Decade  of  Multi-party  Politics  in  Tanzania”   (Nyambari  Nyangwine  Publishers,  Dar  es  Salaam,  2012,  pp 86 – 88).  But   briefly,    it  is   that  ‘multi-party  electoral  democracy   is,  essentially,   the  product  of  a  culture  that   belongs  to,  and  is  deeply  rooted  in,  the  Western  countries  of  Europe,  and  North  America’.   Thus  in  those   countries  which  do  not  have  this  kind  of  culture,   the  implementation  of  multi-party  electoral  democracy  has  been  truly  problematic.   
        Electoral  violence  is  another  factor  which  has  afflicted  the  smooth  operation  of  electoral  democracy  in  a  number  of  jurisdictions;  normally   initiated  by  the  losers,  based   on  complaints   that  the  relevant  election  was   ‘doctored’   by  the  electoral  commission   in  favour  of  the  winning  party.    This   mischief  (allegedly  committed   by  some   irresponsible   electoral  commissions)  has  indeed  been  witnessed    in  several  cases  in  African  elections.   This  was   recently   manifested   in   the  first  round  of  the  bye-election  in  Konde  constituency,  Pemba;   where  the  declared   CCM   winner   quickly  resigned,   even  before  he  had  taken  the  oath  of  office;   presumably  because  his  ‘guilty’   conscience  had  urged  him  to  do  so,  in   honest   acknowledgement  of  the  fact  that  he  had  been   awarded  victory  which   he  did  not  actually  deserve .  
         But    the   lack  of  the  requisite  multi-party  political  culture,    has  been   the   most  significant  factor  which  obstructs  the  smooth  operation  of   the  multi-party  democracy,   that   has  emerged  in  many  Commonwealth  countries  around  the  whole  world;   ranging  from  the  Caribbean  countries   in  the  South  Atlantic  Ocean;    to   Africa;   and  to   Papua  New  Guinea  in  the Pacific  Ocean. 
Let  us   take  the  example    of  Lesotho,  where  it  was  reported  as  follows  in   the  Journal  of  Commonwealth  Parliaments ,   titled  THE  PARLIAMENTARIAN:- “Ever  since  the  independence   of  Lesotho,  political  activity  in  this  country  has  been  partisan  in  form,  and  exclusionary  in  character.   Society  has  been  balkanized  into  new  groupings  which  call  themselves  political  parties,  dedicated  to  vying  for,  and  excluding  one  another  from,  control  of  power.  Political  parties  in  Lesotho  are  the  antitheses  of  nation  building.  There  is  mutual  disdain  and  repugnance  that  members  of  different  political  parties  feel  for  each  other,  and  this  attitude  has  produced  a  basis  for  political  instability ,   that  has  become   a  permanent  feature  of  politics  in  the  country”.  
        A   similar   state  of  affairs  can  also  be  observed  in  many  other  Commonwealth   African  countries;   and  that   can  only  be  attributed  to  this   factor   o f    “lack  the  requisite  multi-party  political  culture”.
piomsekwa@gmail.com  / 0754767576.

Source: Daily News today.