Music of the Week

 

“THE DUTY OF THE OPPOSITION IS TO OPPOSE EVERYTHING, PROPOSE NOTHING, AND THROW OUT THE GOVERNMENT”.

 

The words in the heading of this article, are taken from a statement made by the Leader of the first -ever Opposition party, to be established in British politics in the early 1880s, that was known as the WHIG PARTY.  That statement has been introduced here for a special purpose; which is to draw attention to its similarity to what we are presently witnessing in our own jurisdiction, namely the similar pronouncements which were recently made by the Chairman of the CHADEMA Opposition party, Mr  Freeman Mbowe; at his  press briefing regarding  the resolutions of that political party’s Central Committee, regarding the ‘Intergovernmental Agreement’ that has been entered into between the Tanzania government and that of the Emirate of Dubai, relating to some of the operations of the Dar es Salaam port. This Agreement was approved by the Union Parliament on June 10^th, 2023; but has elicited a ‘deluge’ of public debates and discussions.                                          

            It is my submission, that this is one clear example of our Opposition parties “opposing everything”, obviously for the purpose of throwing out the CCM government. CHADEMA is generally regarded as the main Opposition political party in Tanzania Mainland; and, consequently, harbours the greatest desire to throw the CCM government out of power.                                                      

        The said CHADEMA Central Committee’s resolutions included one that “directs the holding of country wide political rallies that will, among other things, take the issue of the port deal to the people”. Mr. Mbowe  said: “we will be launching the rallies on July 28^th in Kagera Region; and from there we will continue to Geita, Mwanza, Shinyanga, Simiyu, and Mara Regions”. Mr. Mbowe further disclosed that “at its meeting, the Central Committee also resolved to pressurize both the Parliament and the government, to annul that that parliamentary decision regarding the port agreement, applying maximum pressure that is at its disposal”; because, he alleged, “this contract contravenes the Constitution, as well as international laws”.                                               

        Such extravagant statements, which continue to be made in spite of the elaborate explanations that have been provided by the government repeatedly, as well as by the ruling party Secretary General Daniel Chongolo, and many other CCM leaders at public rallies all over the country regarding the expected benefits of this  Agreement,  can only be taken to signify CHADEMA’s devotion to that ‘doctrine’ of  “opposing everything”, obviously with the aim of throwing out the CCM government, seemingly in conformity with that  ‘doctrine’ of the British WHIG PARTY, quoted above.
It is reported that the Leader of the said WHIG PARTY made that statement in response to a direct question that was put to him by British journalists, who were curious to know exactly what this new development (of establishing an Opposition party in Parliament) would actually mean, in the politics of that country; and, more specifically, what the Opposition’s role in Parliament would essentially be.
        It is, of course, granted that in any properly functioning democracy; defeating the government of the day at a parliamentary election, is a totally valid objective and target; as is readily confirmed by the provisions of the law relating to Political Parties, (Act no. 5 of 1992); which stipulates that the purpose, and actually the raison d’etre,  of political parties in Tanzania, is “to participate in elections with the aim of forming the government, either at the National,  or at the Local Authority level”.                  

            It is thus quite clear, and obvious, that the expression: “with a view to forming the government”, also implies the possibility of a political party succeeding to remove the previous government (of another political party) from power.

         Indeed, a responsible Opposition is an essential ingredient for the proper functioning of Parliament; and a properly functioning Parliament is an essential ingredient of any properly functioning democracy. Parliament lies at the heat of a nation’s political life; for it is in Parliament, that both the government and the Opposition are constitutionally enabled to play their complementary roles (of  the Opposition questioning the government’s performance and service delivery; and the government dully defending them); plus other  issues of the day, including the passing of legislation, and calling the government  Ministers  to account. I should, perhaps, emphasize the point, that these principles apply equally to Tanzania, as they do to other democracies around the world. 
        In my presentation of last week, I referred to the Kiswahili proverb “Siri ya mtungi, aijuaye kata; and went on to narrate the little known  story of “the great supremacy debate” which took place in our National Assembly towards the end of the 1960s, and what happened at the end of it; namely the punishment, which the “culprits” were made to suffer, which was their dismissal from the party, and the consequent loss of their seats in Parliament.                                                  

        In my privileged position of knowing such coveted  “siri za mtungi” relating to the Parliament of the United Republic of Tanzania, I feel emotionally urged, to narrate some more of such ‘little known’ stories, for whatever value they may have to our readers.
        One such story is with regard to the common factor of “human jealousy” having successfully intervening in the operations of our Parliament in those yester years; when it succeeded in actually changing the constitutional requirements for the appointment of the person who holds that high office. But that came about much later, starting with the third-phase government of President Benjamin Mkapa, in 1995.                                                                     

         In the meantime, we will narrate the similar story of the same “jealousy” factor, which surfaced earlier, consequent upon the adoption of Kiswahili as the language of proceedings in the National Assembly, when the designation of “Parliamentary Secretary” was translated into “Waziri Mdogo”; a rather diminutive title which, apparently, became unappealing, and unacceptable, to the holders of that office; and the time eventually came, when they decided to voice their dissatisfaction loudly. Their voice was indeed heard, and the designation “waziri Mdogo” was, accordingly, changed to that of “Naibu Waziri”  (Deputy Minister).      
  How the ‘jealousy’ factor successfully intervened.
The earlier constitutions of the United Republic, namely the Tanganyika Republican constitution if 1962, and the Interim Constitution of 1965; were written and published, using the English language. It carried the designation “Parliamentary Secretary”, to describe the title of the government position currently known as “Deputy Minister”.                                       

The jealousy concerning the appointment of the Prime Minister
The  story of this jealousy regarding the appointment of the Prime Minister, is as follows:-                             

         The first person to be appointed to the post of Prime Minister, was Julius Kambarage Nyerere; who was appointed by the then colonial Governor of Tanganyika to that position on 1^st May, 1960, in the run up to the country’s independence.  
        He was subsequently re-appointed Prime Minister on 9^th December, 1961; upon the attainment of Tanganyika’s independence.   But suddenly, and quite surprisingly, he announced his resignation from that position just about a month later, on 22^nd January, 1962; and handed over that position to Rashidi Mfaume Kawawa.  That sudden resignation was, indeed, not only surprising, but was also and absolutely shocking.  These feelings of ‘surprise and shock’, were subsequently correctly expressed  in a book by Jon Hatch,  titled: “Two African Statesmen, Kaunda of Zambia, and Nyerere of Tanzania”, in the following words: “It is virtually unknown for a politician to surrender his office voluntarily. It is certainly unique for a man to lead his country into independence, and then almost immediately retire from the leading position”.
        In relation to the post post of Prime Minister; the available historical records of our country’s constitutional progress after independence in 1961, shows that Tanganyika became a Republic on 9^th December, 1962, (the first anniversary of the country’s independence); with an entirely new Republican constitution; which made no provision for the post of Prime. The  position  that was  established by the Republican constitution, was that of Vice President, to which Rashid Mfaume Kawawa was duly appointed. The occupant of this position was also vested with the responsibility of being the “Leader of Government Business in the National Assembly”.                               
        Thereafter, upon the establishment of the Union between Tanganyika and Zanzibar on 26^th April, 1964; two positions of Vice Presidents of the United republic were created. The President of Zanzibar, Abeid Amani Karume, was appointed First Vice President, and Tanganyika’s Vice President, Rashid Mfaume Kawawa, became the Second Vice President. However, the post of Prime Minister resurfaced in 1972; to which Rashid Kawawa was again appointed, in addition to his being the Second Vice President.                    

         Since the post of Prime Minister was not provided for in the constitution, it would appear that it was just regarded  as another Ministerial position, which could be established (or abolished), by the President at his discretion. Second Vice President Rashidi Kawawa continued to hold the additional responsibility of Prime Minister, until when a new constitution of the United Republic was enacted in 1977; when  President Nyerere appointed  a new Prime Minister,  Edward Moringe Sokoine, Member of Parliament for Monduli.                                                               

             But Edward Sokoine served in that capacity  for only a short period until the 1980 Parliamentary elections; when he was forced to abandon seeking re-election as Member of Parliament for Monduli  due to some serious illness, for which he travelled to Yugoslavia to receive treatment. He was replaced by Cleopa David Msuya, MP for Same constituency.                  

              However, after his successful treatment of his illness, Edward Sokoine returned to the country, and was quickly nominated as a a member of Parliament, and re-appointed Prime Minister, thus becoming the first ‘non-constituency’ Member of Parliament  to be appointed Prime Minister. But unlucky Edward  Sokoine was soon  killed in a tragic road accident in April 1984. He was replaced as Prime Minister by Salim Ahmed Salim, another nominated (non-constituency) Member of Parliament from Zanzibar.        

        But Salim Ahmed Salim was also unlucky, for the reason that the constitution had, in the meantime, been changed to restore the two positions of Vice President of the United Republic, with the stipulation that if the President was elected from Zanzibar, the First Vice President (and Prime Minister) had to be appointed from among the Tanzania Mainland Members of Parliament,
a stipulation which disqualified Salim Ahmed Salim from consideration for that appointment.                                               
        This was during the second-phase government of President Ali Hassan Mwinyi, himself a Zanzibari. He, was therefore obliged to nominate Mainland  Joseph Sinde Warioba, the then Attorney General,  as a Member of Parliament, and appointed him Prime Minister and First Vice President.                                 

        But Joseph Warioba was similarly unlucky in his own way;  for, in his desire to avoid the obvious risk of relying on being again being nominated to Parliament, he contested the 1990 parliamentary election in Bunda constituency;  which he indeed won; but after the due process of the law, the results of the Parliamentary election in Bunda constituency  were  declared “null and void”  by the  competent authority.                                  

        That is when John Samuel Malecela, then Tanzania’s High Commissioner in London, was nominated to Parliament, and appointed Prime Minister.                                                       

         It is this series of appointments of nominated MPs being appointed Prime Minister, that caused this negative “jealousy” among the elected members of Parliament; who successfully conspired to have the constitution changed, in order to specify that the Prime Minister “shall be appointed from among the constituency Members of Parliament”.
piomsekwa@gmail.com /0754767576.

Source: Cde Pius Msekwa
 
 
 
 
    
 

Zim’s Coming Elections Letter to Chamisa and Mnangagwa

Dear Sirs, I know as you do. You’re now busy crisscrossing Zim chasing votes so that you can either get or keep your yummy orts. Allow me to humbly address you as follows:

@ President Emmerson Mnangagwa, please smell the coffee. Is anything different and new you can do for Zim that you failed to do since: a) you’re in Bob’s government? b) since you became President after toppling your comrade-cum-mentor, have you ever evaluated yourself to see if you’ve delivered or not? c) If there’s, can you mention it? d) Has the situation changed since you forcefully and illegally took the helm? e) What do Zims say about your government, especially on jumbo scandals and nepotism that are obvious even before the ears and eyes of birds, insects, and trees? f) Do you still have doable programs, energy, mojo, and sanity to keep on lord it over Zimbabwe really? g) What’s constructively and positively you’ve done since you and the army took power?

            @ Chamisa, I’d like you and all Zims to know. In Bantu’s and African cultures generally, a young person can’t see a senior with a load and let him or her pass without helping him/her.  Failure to help a senior isn’t only a curse and lack of respect but a big problem for a junior and the society at large. When I look at your age, at 45 years old, if Mnangagwa got married at 18, his first child would be 62 and if that child got married at 18, his or her child, who in this sense, is a grandchild of Mnangagwa would be 44. What does this say? The man you’re tussling with is but your grandpa that you’re duty-bound to help to carry whatever load he’s carrying. Based on your age, you need to tell Zim voters to help you help your grandpa, who also is for many young people of the age of majority, thus voters shall they know the importance of their votes and the power they retain in this game of number.

            Knowing how ever demanding and over demanding presidency’s, especially paperwork and traversing the country to see how things go, at 80 years old, your opponent doesn’t have what it takes to deliver or effectively function as a top admin factotum? If you think this is a farfetched hypothesis, remind yourself of a shrewd Jongwe whose senility turned him into a patsy and thereby making it easy for toppling or creating lures for his memsaab and her grovellers to misuse and attempt to grab power even though the latter backfired and flopped.

            If we go by what transpired in what I love to call bedroom politics and privileges, don’t you see that if you or voters refuse to help your grandpa to carry the load can replicate Grace’s disgrace? How many Zimbabweans view this looming danger as such?  Why don’t people want to face the reality that aging’s unstoppably a winner? I know you’re still a tot when in the neighbouring Malawi Hastings Kamuzu Banda met the same limbo and was unseated easily like Bob and forced to retirement that brought about positive changes in Malawi. In Zambia, Kenneth Kaunda’s forced to retire through the ballot box at the age of 67. Nevertheless, uBaba Nelson Mandela (South Africa) read the signs of the time and vacated soon he realised his age wouldn’t allow him to carry on presidential duties. In Tanzania, Julius Nyerere voluntarily vacated at the age of 63. In the Gambia, Dawda Jawara's sent packing peacefully in a bloodless coup when he’s just 70. Like in Zimbabwe, Siaka Stevens (Sierra Leone) was retired after he became senile at Mnangagwa’s age of 80. Furthermore, Abdoulaye Wade (Senegal), in his eighties, was shown the door democratically.

            Dear esteemed gentlemen, what I hypothesize isn’t new. I insist. Instead of employing illicit means of retiring our seniors in upper echelons of power, let’s opt for civilised means, the ballot box. Doing so, firstly, helps our seniors to retire and go home to play with their grandchildren and reconnect with agemates and neighbours. Secondly, we fulfil the ethos of African civilisation and cultures of helping them to carry such heavy burdens that torture them. Thirdly, we bring about positive changes and set precedents for others to follow or reference. Fourthly, we respect our human nature vis-à-vis aging. Fifthly, we obviate our taxpayers a burden and undue expenses of looking after do-nothing, senile, and vile potentates. Sixthly, we help their families to get an opportunity of caring for and enjoying them.

            In a nutshell, Chamisa's a sacred onus to help Mnangagwa by taking the load from his weak shoulders whereas the latter’s the duty to handover the load. More importantly, voters have a sacred duty of helping the two and the country peacefully, which’s obvious the rightest thing to do for all. I thank you both and all.

Source: Indepedent Zimbabwe.

ON THE INTERNATIONAL KISWAHILI DAY, AND PRESIDENT SAMIA’s ADMIRABLE DIPLOMACY.

 

“Usikate tamaa” (never give up hope), is part of what we are taught by the holy books. But It nearly happened to me. Last month, when I celebrated my 88th birthday, I had seriously considered giving up this demanding activity of writing weekly articles for this column, relying on the Biblical saying of “the spirit is willing, but the body is weak”. Fortunately, however, before I made that decision, in came this   encouraging message from Facebook, (the social media that also publishes these articles since they are not restricted by any copyright privileges). The message said that the readership of my articles which are published by Facebook had, as of that date, reached a total of 10,123, 446. Wow . . . The fact that such large numbers of people are actually benefiting from my weekly presentations easily convinced me to abandon taking that selfish decision; and gave me the needed energy, and strength, to “soldier on”.   My weekly articles will therefore continue appearing in this column, as usual.

          Today’s presentation will focus on two significant events which occurred simultaneously last week, and which, I believe, merit penning a special presentation.  They are: (a) the international Kiswahili Day (which falls on Saba Saba day); and (b), President Samia’s diplomatic engagements during her visit to the Republic of Malawi last week.  For reasons of protocol, we will commence with President Samia’s diplomatic achievements during her visit to neighbouring Malawi, at the invitation of her host, Malawi President Dr. Lazarus Chakawe,

            The word “diplomacy” means “the activity of managing relations with other countries”.  Last week, Tanzania President Samia Suluhu Hassan, made an official visit to the neighbouring Republic of Malawi. This is, of course, a normal activity for Presidents worldwide.  But what is particularly significant in this case, is the nature of official functions which she performed during that visit there (which were all well publicized by the social media for everybody to see).                                          

         I wish to refer specifically to the rather unusual event of inaugurating, (jointly with her host the President of Malawi), the new sports jerseys for the Dar es Salaam Young Africans Sports Club (YANGA) in the precincts of Malawi’s IKULU; and thereafter, both Presidents attending a football match between YANGA and the host Malawi team, the Nyasa Big Bullets. These activities were the main events that had been planned for celebrating Malawi’s independence anniversary.

            In my humble, considered opinion, there is a significant lesson to be learnt from these seemingly ordinary events.  In my history course at Makerere University College, Kampala; we were taught a subject option titled: “The Diplomatic Relations of the Great Powers”.  But this was all about the ‘conduct and management of the personal relations between the Rulers  of  certain specified European nations’.   I am inviting our readers to take note of the emphasis I have placed on the expression the “personal relations between the Rulers” of the relevant countries.                                          This is because what we saw in the ‘unusual’ events referred to above, is entirely different, for, in my opinion, it symbolizes the cordial relations existing between the  people of these two countries; and not only between those between the Heads of state. Thi is totally unlike the diplomatic relations between the European Ruling individuals, referred to above.

            In this connection, I would like to draw special attention to the political significance of these events by narrating the story of the past ‘sour’ Tanzania/Malawi relations of yester years. These past sour relations were a creation solely of the then President of Malawi, Dr. Kamuzu Banda; who unilaterally attempted to alter the lake Nyasa boundary between Tanzania and Malawi, which was inherited from the British colonialists at the time of independence of our countries; and which the then “Organization of Unity” meeting in Addis Ababa in 1963; had vowed to  maintain and respect.

            But suddenly and surprisingly, around the mid-1960s; President Kamuzu Banda woke up one day and issued his “unilateral declaration”, attempting to alter this boundary. He arrogantly claimed that “the whole of Lake Nyasa belongs to Malawi”; and even re-named it “Lake Malawi”.  He did not stop there, for he went on to prohibit Tanzanians who live near the shores of Lake Nyasa from carrying out any fishing or other activities in that Lake, by alleging that in so doing, “they would be “trespassing on Malawi Territory”!             These uncouth pronouncements naturally created considerable tension on the part of Tanzanian President, Mwalimu Julius Nyerere, and the ruling party TANU. Fortunately, they did not lead to any physical or armed confrontation.  But still, the TANU Youth League cadres went to the crazy extent of composing and singing some provocative dance songs, such as “Lina wazimu Banda”, and a few such others.  In such sour circumstances, it would have been unimaginable for the President of Tanzania to visit Malawi.                         I do realize that we cannot erase history, whether in its oral, or written form. However, because this narrative relates to those ‘bad old days’ in our diplomatic history, I submit that they should best be erased from our individual memories and forgotten; by “letting bygones be bygones”.                                                                                      Basically, the story has been told here solely for the purpose of signifying the great importance of President Samia’s refreshing diplomacy, of broadening the meaning of “diplomatic relations”, from its old confines of ‘relations between individual rulers’,  to ‘relations between the people’ themselves (in this case between YANGA (wananchi) of Tanzania, and the wananchi  of Malawi);  which is  a spotlight on President Samia’s  admirable diplomacy.

On the International Kiswahili Day.

Viewed from the political and cultural perspective; the expression “SABA SABA” is extraordinarily resilient. For several decades, this expression was carrying  a very high political content  and respect,  for it represented the birthday of TANU (the Tanganyika African National Union), the political party that liberated our country from colonial domination; and thereafter became, and remained, the country’s  “Ruling party” for more than thirty years continuously. under the then “one party” political dispensation, first as a de facto one-party State, from Independence to 1965, and thereafter as a de jure one party State; up to  July, 1992;  when the country became a  constitutional multi-party State. That is when ‘SABA SABA’ lost its political meaning, prominence, and significance.                                           But it bounced back into cultural prominence when it became officially recognized as international Kiswahili Day. Indeed, as the holy books say, “God’s ways are flawless, and his timing, always perfect”. Kiswahili has, progressively, been promoted to an international language.  It was only last year, when Kiswahili was elevated to one of the official languages to be used by the East African Community in its official communications, including the proceedings of its Legislature.  

                A little back in 2019; Kiswahili was accepted by SADC, for use as one of the official languages in its official communications, including the proceedings of its meetings. It has also been accepted for such use by the African Unity Organization.  And now, the United Nations world organization has  declared  SABA SABA Day  as international Kiswahili Day. This is what I meant when I referred above to the “extraordinary resilience” of that expression.

The lost political  glory of SABA SABA Day

‘Saba Saba’ is the Kiswahili expression for the ‘seventh day of the seventh month’. That particular date is of immense political importance in the history of Mainland Tanzania, for the sole reason that it was precisely on that date, way back in 1954, that the Tanganyika African National  Union (TANU), the political party that brought independence to this country, was born.  Thus, right from the year of independence in 1961, “SABA SABA” Day was always, and consistently, celebrated as a public holiday, to commemorate its political significance as the official commencement date of the struggle for the country’s independence.                                       

            It was, therefore, truly saddening for some of us, to witness the ‘withering away’ of that date’s  political significance.  And it was further saddening, when it was replaced by purely commercial events which, although they are of great benefit to the country commercially, but they have no political significance whatsoever. I am here referring to the now dominant annual “Trade Fair” events that now take place annually, which has led to the renaming of ‘Saba Saba’ day as “siku ya Wafanya bishara”.

            But since ‘SABA SABA’ Day’s significance  has now bounced back culturally through  its recognition as international Kiswahili Day; and since Tanzania is generally regarded as the Kiswahili’s spring board to the rest of continental  Africa;  this prestigious international  cultural recognition  is, in my humble opinion, adequate  ‘compensation’  for  its lost ‘political’ glory.  I also remember that there was this ‘comic story’ taking its rounds during the early 1960s, that “Kiswahili was born in Zanzibar; grew up and matured in Tanganyika (now Tanzania Mainland); fell sick in Kenya; and died in Uganda”.  

            But, surprisingly, it was only last week, that  the Ugandan Minister of State for East African Community, Hon. James Magode Ikuya, embarked on a vigorous defense of Uganda regarding this matter.  He was reported in THE CITIZEN of July 6th, 2023; as having defended Uganda against accusations of “not embracing Kiswahili”; in the following words:- “Claims that Ugandans are apprehensive of embracing Kiswahili, are only a myth”;  and added that “the perception that Kiswahili had no place in Uganda, is mere rhetoric and contrary to the reality on the ground. Uganda has been wrongly or rightly seen as a pariah state in the promotion of the Kiswahili language”; he is reported to have said.                      

            It is most unlikely that Minister Ikuya (of the current young generation) was aware of that very old ‘comic story’ regarding Kiswahili having been “killed” in Uganda; but the apparent close connection therewith, is not only  intriguing, but also instructive in some aspects.

Mwalimu Nyerere’s crucial role in the promotion of Kiswahili.

It is only ‘fair and just’, that in any such discussion relating to the promotion of Kiswahili, Mwalimu Nyerere’s crucial role should be remembered, and fully appreciated. Thomas Carlyle (1795 -1881), the Scottish Historian and essayist; said the following in his book titled Heroes and  Hero-worship”:“No great man lives in vain. The history of the world is but the biography of great men”.  I believe that many people would readily agree that Mwalimu Nyerere was one such ‘great man’; for, even after his death, he continues to be remembered and highly respected;  not only   by Tanzanians, but  also by many other personalities beyond our borders; as exemplified by the recent establishment at Kibaha, of the “Mwalimu Nyerere Leadership School”, for the training of political cadres from across Africa.                   

            Mwalimu  Julius  first  showed his determination to promote Kiswahili in all Tanzania’s government operations right from the beginning of his founder Presidency, in January, 1963, when he issued an Executive Order directing them to use of Kiswahili in all their  communications, where possible.  But his personal efforts to promote Kiswahili, are best illustrated by his supreme endeavours to provide proof, that the Kiswahili language is also capable of being used even in highly sophisticated scholarly undertakings; when he translated into Kiswahili  the Holy Bible’s New Testament, to which he gave the title “Tenzi za Biblia”; plus two of William Shakespeare’s famous Plays, “Julius Caesar,  and  “The Merchant of Venice”.piomsekwa@gmail.com   /0754767576.

Chanzo:Cde Msekwa

The ‘purpose, functions’ of Parliament in approving Government budgets

THE long annual budget session of Parliament, duly ended last week.  I guess there are many people who watch, or listen, to the budget proceedings of Parliament, without really appreciating the basic purpose and function of these proceedings. Hence, today’s presentation will focus on this matter, as a contribution to the enhancement of public knowledge and understanding of the representative functions of Parliament.

        The government budget is basically a “reflection of the essential policies of the government which is in office at the material time”.  This short statement entails the need to understand several related issues including the constitutional requirement of dissolving Parliament if it fails to approve the government budget, which is a pretty serious matter;  because a dissolution terminates the life of that particular Parliament and must be followed by a general election.
        There are two ways in which to interpret the purpose of government budget.  One way is to just look at the figures representing the estimates of the revenues and expenditures shown in the relevant financial year. But this is far too simplistic and does not reveal the true ‘function and purpose’ of government budgets which is the basic matter that should be realised and properly appreciated. This ‘simplistic’ approach is what we saw in ‘The Daily News’ of Tuesday, June 27th 2023, which carried the following news in bold capitals on its front page: “House unanimously approves 44.4 trillion government budget”. This was merely an ‘excited reporting’ of the otherwise ‘ordinary news’, that the Parliament of the United Republic of Tanzania had, by an overwhelming majority, approved the government’s 2023/24 government budget.  

         It is, of course, very impressive that the government has been able to reach this high level performance, which is unprecedented in all our history; as these huge sums of money will be channeled into the construction of the much needed economic and social  development  projects, all over our geographically vast country. Indeed, ‘credit must be given where credit is due’.
        However, it is equally important to note, that Parliament’s approval of the government annual budget  is, in fact, ‘ordinary news’, simply because Parliament cannot possibly refuse to approve any government of the government’s annual budgets.  That is the crucial lesson that should be learnt from all the parliamentary budget sessions. This is so because the British-based parliamentary system (which we inherited at the time of independence), was designed precisely for the purpose of achieving that specific objective of ensuring that the government budget is always approved.
        This assurance is firmly embodied in the concept of “government by political party”; which provides that ‘the political party that is given power to govern the country, shall be that party which has a majority of Members in Parliament’. It follows therefore, that the ruling party is entitled to use its majority in the House to ensure that its budget is approved. This is what explains why the approval of the government budget by Parliament, is just ordinary news.
        In the instant case of the 2023/24 government budget, a total of 354 MPs voted in favour of the budget; while 18 (Opposition) MPs abstained (i.e. did not vote in favour or against the budget). We will return to this budget exposition a little later. In the meantime, let us consider what I regard as an unnecessary intrusion in parliamentary debates on the 2023/24 budget debate in Parliament.
The intrusion of the Dar e salaam Port operations’ debate
An unnecessary intrusion in this year’s Parliamentary budget debates, was the matter of the ‘Intergovernmental Agreement’  between Tanzania and the United Arab Emirates  concerning partnership on ports development; whose many benefits include improvements in the efficiency of operations at the port of Dar es Salaam;  but which the ‘professional’ detractors have claimed that it  amounts to privatising the Dar es Salaam port!
        Such a deliberate  distortion  quickly reminded me of some of  Tanzania’s founder-President, Mwalimu Julius Nyerere’s  ‘teachings’  in this respect and in particular, that of “Argue, don’t shout”, which was a policy document regarding Tanzania’s Foreign policy in which President Nyerere issued the following guidance:- “Tanzania has definite viewpoints on Foreign Affairs. When the need arises for us to argue in their defense, we have to state firmly what they are, why we have adopted them and what they mean to our nation. It is essential for us to do so, because we either to influence people or to enable them to  better understand why we have adopted a certain line of action. And for either of these purposes, we have to argue, not to shout about it”. Hence the abbreviation: ‘argue, don’t shout’.
        The advocates of the distortions mentioned above  of “privatising Dar es Salaam port”;  were nothing more than ”shouting”, for lack of  “argument”, that is to say,  lack of  reasons to show that what is being said  is true or correct.
        Fortunately however, the government’s accredited spokespersons quickly intervened, by detailing the benefits that will accrue from that ‘public/private partnership’ (PPP) deal. The Government Chief S Gerson Msigwa, addressed members of the Press and made a statement assuring the public that “there is no  intention of privatising the Dar es Salaam port in  the government’s  decision to partner with the Dubai-based  DP World Company in the Dar es Salaam port operation”.
        While Prime Minister Kassim Majaliwa, when he was adjourning the  2023/24 budget session of Parliament, urged Tanzanians not to be divided by the differing opinions expressed by different people  relating to the Inter-government Agreement between Tanzania and the Emirate of Dubai. “Let us reject any opinions that will likely split our country on any ground”, the Prime Minister urged.
        Mwalimu Nyerere had a penchant for telling ‘catchy’ stories, in order to buttress his teachings which he delivered through his speeches.  There is another such story that was told by him in connection with this  human  weakness of resorting to “shouting  for lack of “argument”. It is about a religious preacher, who was reviewing his written sermon, which he had prepared for delivery in his church the following morning, when he reached a paragraph whose theological foundation appeared to be weak and unconvincing. So he made a marginal note beside that paragraph, in which he scribbled this:“theology weak, shout”. 
        The moral of this story, is, basically, that it cautions people to avoid “shouting” in  cases where their argument becomes conspicuously weak.
        And this seems to be the case in relation to the ‘conspirators’ who cooked up the false, alleged story, of the ‘privatisation of Dar es Salaam Port’; which was actually never intended by the government! We will ow return to the budget function exposition. There are two basic functions which are performed by the government budget. One is “to implement the government’s accountability to Parliament” and the other is “to reflect the policies of the government of the day”. These functions are elaborated in the paragraphs below.
(i)    Government’s accountability to Parliament.
The main function and purpose of the government budget, is to ‘implement the government’s accountability to Parliament’. This is specifically prescribed by Articles 63(2) and (3) of the constitution of the United Republic of Tanzania, 1977; empowers Parliament “Kuisimamia na kuishauri serikali”; and prescribes the ways in which this particular function will be performed. These include Parliament’s scrutiny and approval, of the government’s annual budget (art.63 (3) (b) and (c)).
        It is also important to note that the function of “approving the government budget” is a matter of grave constitutional importance; because article 90 (2) (b) of the constitution requires and directs the President to dissolve Parliament, in case it fails to approve any government budget; a very serious matter indeed, for a dissolution of Parliament must be followed by the holding of a new  general election.
        It is in recognition of the seriousness of this constitutional provision, that the ‘Rules of procedure’ of the House were crafted in the way which introduces the seemingly unusual procedure of “voting by roll-call” on every motion which seeks approval of the annual government budget. It is unusual because voting in Parliament of all other motions, is normally done by “voice vote”, which is cast by the all members collectively. The roll-call procedure was introduced specifically in order to obtain more reliable and undisputable results of the vote to approve the relevant government proposals.
        But that was the first challenge I received when I became Speaker of the first multi-party Parliament in 1995; at the time of voting to approve the 1995/96 government budget. The Opposition camp had expected that we would use the normal “voice vote” method, which is the only one they had experienced since their entry into the House after the general election of October, 1995. Apparently because  that false expectation, they had made plans  to convince some of the CCM MPs to join them in rejecting that budget.
        Thus, as the time of voting approached, I rose to explain the ‘roll-call’ procedure that would be used in approving the budget, plus the reasons for it. I had, apparently, frustrated their secret plan; hence, they responded by walking out of the House, in protest. However, because CCM had a huge majority in the House (there were, in fact, enough of them to constitute a quorum); the voting process continued and the government budget was approved “nemine contradicente”  i. e. with no one dissenting.
(ii) A reflection of government policies.
For parliamentary purposes, the vote to approve the government budget is treated as a “vote of confidence” in the government of the day. Conversely, a rejection of its budget is treated as a “vote of no confidence” in that government. That is why a rejection of the government budget necessarily leads to the dissolution of Parliament; in order to give the electorate the opportunity to elect a new government which will, hopefully, have the confidence of the people’s representatives.
        These are  absolutely essential  and vital, constitutional issues which should be  clearly understood by the electorate; in order to enable them to “vote wisely”
Zitto Kabwe’s attempt to introduce ‘an alternative Opposition budget’      
This is a clear illustration of the kind of public ‘ignorance’ that generally exists regarding this matter.  Hon Zitto Kabwe  was the leader of the  ACT- Wazalendo Opposition political party and member of Parliament (MP) for the Kigoma Urban Constituency during the 2018/2019 budget session of Parliament.
        Just before the commencement of that session, he announced his intention to introduce what he called “an alternative Opposition budget”  in Parliament, during that session; “because he was dissatisfied with the Government budget”; which, he alleged, “imejikita zaidi kwenye maendeleo ya vitu, badala ya maendeleo ya watu”.
‘Alternative budgets’ are unknown in parliamentary processes.     
In fact, an ‘alternative budget’ is something which is completely unknown in the normal Parliamentary processes. Consequently, no provision has ever been made in the Rules of procedure for the transaction of such business in the House. Thus, Zitto  Kabwe’s  plans  were “a shot in the dark” (which is defined as “a guess, or something you do without knowing what the results will be)” for the reason only that the operations of  parliamentary  system, just could not allow him to do that.
piomsekwa@gmail.com  / 0754767576.

Source: Daily News yesterday.

Sub Saharan Africa Must Fight Racist Maghreb Now

 

News that Tunisia is now deporting what it views as illegal immigrants from Sub-Saharan Africa is not good news. It is pure racism against the SSA, which the SSA countries need to fight timely and viciously. Although racism against Black People’s been rife in the Maghreb and the world, it recently took precarious turn when Tunisian President Kais Saed, a retired professor of law, brashly unleashed a purge against what he referred to as Black Africans who’s quoted as saying that “the undeclared goal of the successive waves of illegal immigration is to consider Tunisia a purely African country that has no affiliation to the Arab and Islamic nations” (Guardian, Feb 23, 2023). Outrageously, the world did nothing about Saed’s criminality whose sentiments show that, like other Africans from the Maghreb and somewhat North Sudan, wrongly feels he’s an Arab but not  an Africa. If Tunisia isn’t purely African, why’s it still a member of the AU? Why don’t all those harbouring such farcical mindsets pack and go to the Arab countries, which–––I’m pretty sure–––will purge and send them back to where they belong.

        Nonetheless, the irony is, when such persons go to the Middle East, they’re reminded of who they actually are, Africans per se. Then, how dare he? Now that Saed stood his ground and purged all Black Sub Saharans who were in Tunisia legally and illegally, why’s the world conspired with him as collective victims kept mum while being blatantly and openly discriminated against, tortured, and purged in what Saed illegal crackdown? Legally, a crackdown’s a legal action against illegality, which doesn’t apply in Saed’s racist purgatives––– not all were in the country illegally as per Saed’s distorted application of the term. Why? Salsabil Chellali, Tunisia’s office director for Human Rights watch says that “what we are seeing right now is really an increase of violence against sub-Saharan violence or students, and, really, a climate of fear” (VOA, March 2, 2023).

        Up until now, a month down the line, Sub-Saharan Africa’s failed to unite and voice its dander and take deserved actions against this collective discrimination done by an African country against Africans. Is this different from afrophobic South Africa’s attacks, which receive deserved condemnations and threats to sever relationships with South Africa? Why’ve victims and the world at large conspired with Tunisia’s blatant racism against their people? What makes matters worse is the fact that the same Sub Saharan Africans who are victims, mainly Muslims take to the streets whenever an Arab country is maltreated. What’s wrong here? Isn’t this self-discrimination and inferiority complex? Ironically, when all African countries and the world has not adequately addressed and ignored this obvious and obnoxious move, Romdhane Ben Amor, spokesperson for the Tunisian Forum for Economic and Social Rights (FTDES) condemned and said that “it is a racist approach, just like the campaigns in Europe.”

            It came to light last year that Africans were sold to slavery in Libya. Again, the world kept mum on it while it hollered over US’ recognition of Jerusalem as a capital of Israel that took place at the same time. It seems approx. 10 million Israelis and 5 million Palestinians respectively are more important than 1.4 billion Africans because of colour and geopolitics. Twelve years ago before, former Libya potentate who pretended to be a Pan Africanist, Muamar Gadaffi shocked the world when he’s quoted as saying that “there is a dangerous level of immigration from Africa into Europe and we don't know what will happen. What will be the reaction of the white Christian Europeans to this mass of hungry uneducated Africans?” (Guardian, September 1, 2010).

        The situation is worse, and it needs a collective African voice of conscience by our leaders. The New York Times (March 2, 2023) notes that “as African migrants are swept up in a widening crackdown, critics say President Kais Saied is openly mining a deep vein of discrimination and prejudice against dark-skinned people in Tunisia.” What are our rulers waiting for not taking Tunisia on even heavily punishing it? What precedent are they setting? Will Tunisia easily get away with murder like Europe has? What’s be done and when?

In sum, now, what should Africa in general, especially the AU whose response was simply to say it was shocked without taking any stern measures do? I propose the following:

        Firstly, kick Tunisia out of the AU up until the authorities there do the right thing, which is for Saed to make an apology.

        Secondly, legal actions before African Court of Human and People’s Rights (ACHPR) or the International Criminal Court (ICC) should be instituted to see to it that culprits are arraigned and prosecuted.

        Thirdly, Tunisia should be ordered redress and allow the victims back to the country to go on with what they’re doings, especially those who were there legally.

Fourthly, African countries must expel Tunisia’s ambassadors and sever ties with it up until it rectifies its crimes and errors.

Source: Independent Zimbabwe.