The above quoted words were pronounced by ACT-WAZALENDO national leader Zito Kabwe, in his positive response to President Samia Suluhu Hassan’s decision to lift the ban on political rallies; and to resume the the stalled ‘constitution review’ process; plus her promise to have various obnoxious laws reviewed. That will be the subject of today’s presentation. But before we get there, we wish first to give due recognition to the special political significance of this particular day, 12th January, 2023, which is Zanzibar’s ‘Mapinduzi Day’; that marks the 59th anniversary of that glorious Revolution which overthrew Sultan Jamshid Abdulla’s Arab minority government.
We thus joyfully join our Zanzibar brethren in celebrating this great day in the political history of Zanzibar. And, indeed, “all men and women of good will” will similarly be joining the President and the people of Zanzibar in celebrating this auspicious occasion.
For the benefit of our younger generation, it may be helpful to briefly narrate the story behind this revolution, especially the reason why it happened. The relevant background is that the Zanzibar State had an unfortunate long history, of conflict laden, plus post-election violence; starting right from the first general election which was held there in July 1957; in which the Arab Zanzibar Nationalist Party lost dismally. The annual report of the colonial Provincial Administration for the year 1958, states that “the year (1957) was notable for the extent to which ‘hate politics’ infested almost every sector of life in Zanzibar. Traders, cultivators, labourers, fishermen, and even housewives, were all affected. Funerals and religious functions were boycotted by rival political groups. Women even pawned their clothes in order to raise funds for the Bus fare to political meetings! Such were the immediate results of the first common roll elections for these formerly peaceful Islands”.
Thereafter, every subsequent general elections was similarly marred by endless conflicts and violence, caused principally by the colonial Administration’s unfair practice of gerrymandering the constituency boundaries in favour of the Arab political parties. This was particularly apparent in the pre-independence general election of July, 1963. It is on record that Sir George Mooring, the last official “British Resident” in Zanzibar, as well as Mwalimu Julius Nyerere, the President of Tanganyika; both warned the British government against granting independence in such controversial circumstances; but this warning was ignored; and the British just went ahead and granted the instruments of Independence to Sultan Jamshid Abdulla, at midnight on 9/10th December, 1963.
For the benefit of our younger generation, it may be helpful to briefly narrate the story behind this revolution, especially the reason why it happened. The relevant background is that the Zanzibar State had an unfortunate long history, of conflict laden, plus post-election violence; starting right from the first general election which was held there in July 1957; in which the Arab Zanzibar Nationalist Party lost dismally. The annual report of the colonial Provincial Administration for the year 1958, states that “the year (1957) was notable for the extent to which ‘hate politics’ infested almost every sector of life in Zanzibar. Traders, cultivators, labourers, fishermen, and even housewives, were all affected. Funerals and religious functions were boycotted by rival political groups. Women even pawned their clothes in order to raise funds for the Bus fare to political meetings! Such were the immediate results of the first common roll elections for these formerly peaceful Islands”.
Thereafter, every subsequent general elections was similarly marred by endless conflicts and violence, caused principally by the colonial Administration’s unfair practice of gerrymandering the constituency boundaries in favour of the Arab political parties. This was particularly apparent in the pre-independence general election of July, 1963. It is on record that Sir George Mooring, the last official “British Resident” in Zanzibar, as well as Mwalimu Julius Nyerere, the President of Tanganyika; both warned the British government against granting independence in such controversial circumstances; but this warning was ignored; and the British just went ahead and granted the instruments of Independence to Sultan Jamshid Abdulla, at midnight on 9/10th December, 1963.
As far as the Afro-Shirazi Party was concerned, this was the “last straw that broke the camel’s back”; and active secret preparations for the overthrow of the Sultan’s government, commenced soon thereafter.
In the matter of political reform.
“Political leaders hail political rebuilding”; so said the Daily News of Wednesday, January 4th, 2023 on its front page, and continued thus : “political leaders have welcomed President Dr. Samia’s decision to lift the ban on political rallies, saying that the move is crucial in building democracy for sustainable development. They also hailed President Samia’s commitment to revive the constitutional review process, as well as amending various laws”.
In the matter of political reform.
“Political leaders hail political rebuilding”; so said the Daily News of Wednesday, January 4th, 2023 on its front page, and continued thus : “political leaders have welcomed President Dr. Samia’s decision to lift the ban on political rallies, saying that the move is crucial in building democracy for sustainable development. They also hailed President Samia’s commitment to revive the constitutional review process, as well as amending various laws”.
This will be our main topic for discussion in this presentation; but we will focus primarily on the specific matter of reviving the stalled constitutional review process.
President Samia said the following, in her powerful speech delivered on that occasion:- “We have been brainstorming on this matter for a long time now. Some stakeholders have proposed that we should start with the Warioba draft; while others are of the view that since the Warioba draft was crafted eight years ago, many things have changed in the meantime; which makes it necessary to look at the current situation and proceed from there.
President Samia said the following, in her powerful speech delivered on that occasion:- “We have been brainstorming on this matter for a long time now. Some stakeholders have proposed that we should start with the Warioba draft; while others are of the view that since the Warioba draft was crafted eight years ago, many things have changed in the meantime; which makes it necessary to look at the current situation and proceed from there.
Hence, the crucial question that seeks to be answered is this : What then, should be our starting point? A country’s constitution is commonly defined as “the basic, or fundamental law of the country, which lays down its Executive, Legislative, and Judicial Institutions; and describes the functions of each of these institutions, as well their powers and relations between them; It provides for the distribution of powers among them, and the relations between them.
It is my contention that the current (1977) constitution of the United Republic, fits exactly into this definition; for it makes appropriate provision for the establishment of these institutions of State governance; plus providing for other essential matters, specifically, the fundamental principles and objectives of State policy; the basic rights and duties of the country’s citizens; the provisions for State financing; and for the establishment of the country’s Armed Forces.
But apart from that, there are the established “constitutional principles”, which have guided all our past constitution-making processes, starting with the Tanganyika Republican constitution of 1962 onwards. Basically, these are the principles of democracy; and of the ethics and integrity for the people’s chosen leaders. Thus:-
It is my contention that the current (1977) constitution of the United Republic, fits exactly into this definition; for it makes appropriate provision for the establishment of these institutions of State governance; plus providing for other essential matters, specifically, the fundamental principles and objectives of State policy; the basic rights and duties of the country’s citizens; the provisions for State financing; and for the establishment of the country’s Armed Forces.
But apart from that, there are the established “constitutional principles”, which have guided all our past constitution-making processes, starting with the Tanganyika Republican constitution of 1962 onwards. Basically, these are the principles of democracy; and of the ethics and integrity for the people’s chosen leaders. Thus:-
*the constitution must recognize the fundamental equality of all human beings, and the right of every individual to dignity and respect. Consequently, the constitution must ensure that:- * there shall be maximum political freedom for all the citizens, within the confines of the law; * there shall be maximum possible participation by the citizens in their own government, and ultimate control by them. *there shall be complete freedom for the citizens to choose their representatives on all the Legislative Organs. *the fundamental rights and duties of every citizen; as well as the principles of good governance, especially the rule of law, are duly observed.
It was intended that all of these principles will be duly incorporated in our current constitution, but, alas, other considerations led the constitution makers to make some obvious mistakes, for example by failing to allow the participation of ‘private candidates’ in all our elections; by including a provision which stipulated that “in order to qualify for election, a candidate must belong to a registered political party, and his/her candidature must be sponsored by such political party”.
It was intended that all of these principles will be duly incorporated in our current constitution, but, alas, other considerations led the constitution makers to make some obvious mistakes, for example by failing to allow the participation of ‘private candidates’ in all our elections; by including a provision which stipulated that “in order to qualify for election, a candidate must belong to a registered political party, and his/her candidature must be sponsored by such political party”.
This constitutional provision has generated considerable debate and criticism among stakeholders, who rightly feel that this is a beach of the people’s fundamental right “to freely participate in their own government”. I have myself contributed to the weak defense of this provision, by relying wholly on the doctrine which presents the role of elections as that of “building majorities of relatively like-minded persons in the Legislature, in order to facilitate the decision-making processes therein. Mea culpa.
However, as the Holy Bible says in Ecclesiastes, 3; 1-8: “to everything there is a season; and a time for every purpose under the heaven”. At the time when we were tasked to prepare proposals for the current 1977 constitution, our country was operating under the “One-party constitution political dispensation. We were thus obliged to take into account the needs and requirements of that time.
However, as the Holy Bible says in Ecclesiastes, 3; 1-8: “to everything there is a season; and a time for every purpose under the heaven”. At the time when we were tasked to prepare proposals for the current 1977 constitution, our country was operating under the “One-party constitution political dispensation. We were thus obliged to take into account the needs and requirements of that time.
But all that notwithstanding, I feel must personally confess, and beg for forgiveness, for my complicity in this constitutional ‘malpractice’. For I was the Secretary to the 20-man commission, which was tasked by CCM, to prepare the proposals for this constitution. And In that capacity, I was the initiator of the recommendations for all the proposals, which were then submitted to the said commission for consideration and approval. I can therefore disclose the principal reason which accounts for this apparent constitutional ‘malpractice’.
In that connection, I will refer to the clear warning that is embedded in President powerful speech, namely that “the desired constitution must be Tanzania’s mother law, something suitable for all Tanzanians; and not a political party’s constitution”. There is no denying the fact that some of the contents of the current constitution, were indeed dictated by CCM, the ruling party; and specifically, the provision regarding the ‘two-government’ structure of the Union. And I have humbly admitted that fact in Chapter Seven of my book titled “Historia ya Muungano wa Tanganyika na Zanzibar” (Tanzania Educational Publishers Ltd, Bukoba, 2019). In that Chapter, I have explained, in great detail, how this policy was determined through a party referendum which was held in 1993; just before the transition to the multi-party parliament in 1995.
The referendum had been necessitated by the adoption by the one-party Parliament, of a resolution demanding the establishment of a separate government for Tanzania Mainland, which would have resulted in a three-government structure of the Union. That resolution was, in effect, a rebellion against the said party policy.
The referendum had been necessitated by the adoption by the one-party Parliament, of a resolution demanding the establishment of a separate government for Tanzania Mainland, which would have resulted in a three-government structure of the Union. That resolution was, in effect, a rebellion against the said party policy.
The results of the said referendum were that 61% of the entire CCM membership had voted in favour of retaining the two-government structure of the Union. These referendum results imposed an obligation on members of that Parliament “to go back to the drawing board” and rescind their previous resolution; which they quickly did.
Regarding the matter of private candidates in elections.
This other matter of denying the right to independent candidates to participate in elections, is also a carryover from the policies of the ruling party, that was inadvertently imported into the country’s constitution. In this case also, there is no valid reason for denying the argument (which has been advanced by many concerned stakeholders), that this provision is a breach of the ‘freedom of association’ which is guaranteed to every citizen by the constitution of the United Republic.
Regarding the matter of private candidates in elections.
This other matter of denying the right to independent candidates to participate in elections, is also a carryover from the policies of the ruling party, that was inadvertently imported into the country’s constitution. In this case also, there is no valid reason for denying the argument (which has been advanced by many concerned stakeholders), that this provision is a breach of the ‘freedom of association’ which is guaranteed to every citizen by the constitution of the United Republic.
And, similarly, as has also been argued by the concerned stakeholders, there is no cogent reason for denying the electors their right to vote “for a person of integrity whom they know well, in preference to voting for a party candidate simply on the basis of a party programme that is skillfully promoted in a party election campaign”. Now, the crucial question: how then, should we proceed from here? In my humble, considered opinion, we should “throw the bucket where we are”.
The expression “throw your bucket where you are” is derived from the story of a cargo ship, which reportedly had been stranded for many days somewhere in the Atlantic Ocean; but the captain did not know exactly where they were. So, he sent a desperate signal to the ship owners, requesting an urgent supply of drinking water for the crew. The reply came swiftly: “throw your bucket where you are”. What this meant was that the stranded ship was actually in the precise location where the Amazon river enters the Ocean; so they were actually in the middle of fresh water from that river.
This analogy seems to me to be relevant, and applicable, to the situation in which we currently are, regarding the matter or matter of resuming our constitutional review process. It is my humble submission, that we should ‘throw the bucket where we currently are”; by taking stock of all the past endeavours in this connection, and adding thereto any new ideas that may seem appropriate in the present circumstances.
This analogy seems to me to be relevant, and applicable, to the situation in which we currently are, regarding the matter or matter of resuming our constitutional review process. It is my humble submission, that we should ‘throw the bucket where we currently are”; by taking stock of all the past endeavours in this connection, and adding thereto any new ideas that may seem appropriate in the present circumstances.
Furthermore, considering the fact that there are those established ‘constitutional principles’ (mentioned above) that are applicable to every democratic constitution; it is presumed that these will need no revision. And since these principles are already incorporated in the current constitution (disregarding the failings and the malpractices mentioned above); the current situation seems to be the most appropriate starting point for the resumption of our constitutional review process. We should first rectify the past malpractices, and then proceed to identify and incorporate any new ideas.
piomsekwa@gmail.com /0754767576.
piomsekwa@gmail.com /0754767576.
Source: Cde Msekwa
No comments:
Post a Comment