From the
parliamentary point of view, last week presented a unique, triple assortment of
interesting Parliamentary events taking place simultaneously, ranging from a rather
unusual one which took place in London England; to the local events taking
place in Zanzibar, and Dar es Salaam. They were,
respectively, the prorogation of the British House of Commons; the annual
Conference of the Commonwealth (Africa Region) Conference; and Tundu Lissu’s court
case against Speaker Job Ndugai; in which the former Singida Mashariki constituency
MP is challenging his removal from membership of the Union Parliament.I have chosen
this Parliamentary topic for discussion in today’s article, primarily because of
that institution’s fundamental and high-profile status in the country’s
constitutional outfit, and the level of respect accorded to it in Tanzania’s
political landscape. In the light of that, It will be helpful to update our esteemed readers on that
august Institution’s high Constitutional status, which is what
presumably accounts for the
general public’s interest in the
normal proceedings of
that Constitutional Organ itself, and its
other associated activities or functions, such as the
events which are mentioned
above.
Parliament
and the Constitution.
The Preamble
to our country’s Constitution reads as
follows (translated from Kiswahili): “ Whereas
we, the people of the United
Republic of Tanzania, have formally decided to build and develop our nation’s community based on the principles of freedom, justice, brotherhood and peace;. AND
whereas these principles can only
be realized in a truly democratic society whose Government is answerable to a Parliament
consisting of representatives directly elected by the people themselves; NOW
THEREFORE, for that purpose, we hereby
give to ourselves this Constitution, which is enacted
by the Parliament of the United Republic of Tanzania on behalf of all
the people of this land.
But Parliament’s high-profile status in
the country’s constitutional outfit is further illustrated by the statements
made, at different times, by the country’s top leadership, namely, by Prime
Minister Rashidi Kawawa in 1962, and by President, Mwalimu Julius Nyerere in
1964.
When he was
introducing the Bill for the adoption of the Tanganyika Republican Constitution
for discussion in the National Assembly in November 1962, Prime Minister
Rashidi M. Kawawa said: - “The proposal to have an executive President, in no
way derogates the authority or status of this Parliament. The moral authority
of any Government must ultimately depend on the consent of the people whore
governed. This is the basis of democracy, and, in practice, democracy is best
maintained by means of a freely elected Parliament, having sovereign power to
make laws, to raise taxes, and to vote money for public purposes. Parliament is the voice of the of the nation,
and the fount of authority, which must remain sovereign.”
And on his part,
President Julius Nyerere, in his address to the National Assembly on 25th
April, 1964; said the following: - “This Parliament is the supreme Organ of the
people of Tanganyika. No important Constitutional
issues can be finally decided by any individual person, or group of persons, other
than this august Assembly.”
Such observations
by the country’s top leadership, clearly serve to confirm Parliament’s high-profile
status, and the high respect it deserves, in the political landscape of
Tanzania. This also presumably implies that
many people would be interested to know more about such extraordinary parliamentary
events, as those that occurred last week.
And that, precisely,
is what gave me the appetite, plus the motivation, to craft today’s article;
which is designed to provide some useful additional information in connection with
the three unrelated separate parliamentary events that occurred last week. simultaneously in London, Zanzibar, and in Dar
es Salaam; whose details are discussed here below,
The prorogation of the British House of
Commons.
“To prorogue
Parliament” simply means the act of ‘suspending the sittings of Parliament for
a specified (usually very brief) period by the Sovereign. It is a long established convention of the
British Parliament, which, during the colonial days, was also
exported to all the Legislatures of countries which were
ruled by Britain, including Tanganyika; and was therefore incorporated in the
Tanganyika Independence Constitution (
which had been crafted in London); wherein
the power to prorogue the Tanganyika Parliament was vested in Her
Majesty the Queen, but exercisable on
her behalf by her resident
representative in Dar es Salaam, the
Governor-General. Actually, the
‘Government White Paper’ which had been prepared for the purpose of informing
the public regarding the Government’s proposals for the Republican Constitution,
had specifically recommended the retention of this power.
However, indeed
most fortunately, the inherent dangers of that power
appear to have been well-known to the far-sighted Mwalimu Nyerere, who
therefore directed the makers of the Tanganyika Republic Constitution of 1962, NOT
to include this power in that first ‘home-made’ Constitution. This fact was
disclosed by Prime Minister Rashidi Kawawa in his speech introducing the
relevant Government Bill for discussion in the National Assembly, when he said
the following: “Mr. Speaker, the abolition of the power to prorogue Parliament
is a major departure from the Government Paper. We have accepted it after full consideration,
in order to emphasize the sovereignty of Parliament.”
The dangers inherent
in the power to prorogue Parliament (which were foreseen by Mwalimu Nyerere way
back in 1962), are what are now greatly troubling the British Parliament in
London. Although it is perfectly legal, yet the said action has enraged many of
the MPs in the House of Commons. For example, the Deputy Leader of the main opposition
Labour Party, has strongly denounced it by saying that “This action is an
entirely scandalous affront to our democracy, we cannot let this happen”. While
the Liberal Democrat’s spokesman said: “The mother of all Parliaments will not
allow him (Prime Minister Boris Johnson) to shut the peoples’ Parliament out of
the biggest decision facing our country (Brexit). His declaration of war will be met with an
iron fist”. The Green Party spokesperson called it “a constitutional outrage”; and
many other critical comments made by other
MPs.
But these were
only the initial hostile reactions to the British Parliament’s prorogation
measure. More serious fighting by MPs against it is widely expected to follow, with the possibility
that it may even force the calling of a new general election, in order to
resolve that nasty conflict.
The
Commonwealth Parliamentary Conference in Zanzibar.
The current generation is probably not so well informed about the
value of the Commonwealth and its benefits to Tanzania. It may thus be helpful
to them to quote here the words of Prime Minister Mwalimu Julius Nyerere (as he was at the relevant time), which he used in his speech delivered
in the Tanganyika Legislative Council on 5th June, 1961; when he was
explaining the benefits of joining the
Commonwealth upon the attainment of Tanganyika’s independence in December of that
year. He said the
following: “Mr. Speaker, I feel sure
that this National Assembly can see nothing but good from our request to join
the Commonwealth. This is an Association
which does truly work. For more than any other group of nations in the world
today, the Commonwealth binds together in friendship and like-mindedness an
astonishing variety of nations, great and small; without distinction between
them, and without discrimination among themselves. Stronger than treaties, less
selfish than alliances, and less restrictive than any other associations, the
Commonwealth seems to us to offer much hope in the world today for lasting peace
and friendship among the peoples of the world.”
Thus, at the political
level, the ‘Commonwealth’ brings together the Heads of Government of all the
member countries, who meet regularly every two years; and also brings together the
Parliamentarians of all those countries, under the umbrella of the
‘Commonwealth Parliamentary Association’ (CPA). This Association is structured in terms of
continental ‘Regions’, one of which is the ‘Africa Region’; which was holding
its annual Conference in Zanzibar last week. During my Speakership, I hosted one such
conference in Arusha, in 1995.
The basic
purpose of the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association is “the
strengthening of parliamentary systems, and the promotion of the
democratic principles of good
governance and the rule of law in its
member countries; by actively promoting knowledge and education about the
constitutional, legislative, economic, social and cultural systems within the
Commonwealth parliamentary framework.”
It is in
pursuance of that objective of ‘strengthening the parliamentary systems in
member countries’, that
the CPA
Africa Region conference held in
Zanzibar last week, focused mainly
on “the need to broaden the use of Information and communications technologies to improve
the parliamentary processes”;
with participants expressing
confidence that “by fully adopting
the e-parliament system, African
Parliaments will have achieved an
important milestone towards enhancing
democracy and greater effectiveness, in
their service deliveries”.
Tundu
Lissu’s litigation against Speaker Ndugai: the relevant facts.
Tundu Lissu, Member of Parliament for Singida
Mashariki (as he was then) lost
his membership of Parliament entirely by
operation of article 71(1)(c)
of the Constitution of the United
Republic of Tanzania, which provides as follows: “Mbunge atakoma kuwa Mbunge, na ataacha kiti
chake katika Bunge, litokeapo lolote kati ya mambo yafuatayo--
(a) . . . . . . (b) . . .
. . .
(c) Ikiwa Mbunge atakosa kuhudhuria vikao vya
mikutano ya Bunge mitatu mfululizo, bila
ruhusa ya Spika”
The words “bila ruhusa ya Spika” are the ones which
create the offence that attracts the prescribed punishment, of an MP having to lose
his parliamentary seat. In other words, such
permission must be sought and
obtained. When that is neglected, the Speaker’s responsibility is limited to only
informing the National Electoral Commission, about the occurrence of a vacancy
in the National Assembly seats, a duty which he is compelled to perform by a specific section of the National
Elections Act, 1985.
But Tundu
Lissu was quick to challenge in court what he called “the decision of the
Speaker” to unseat him. Perhaps, I should
say it one more time, for the sake of emphasis, that his removal from
Parliament was NOT the Speaker’s decision. But, surprisingly,
Tundu Lissu’s submission included a (rather strange) request to the court, “to
issue an order to stop his elected replacement from being sworn in before the
set hearing date”. W o w! Attempting to
stop a formal parliamentary process externally?
That is, surely, something that was more in the nature of pure theatricals! However, at this stage (at the time of
writing), we can say no more about this matter, since the case is still in the
process of being heard before the High
Court of Tanzania.
But it may
be of some interest to our readers, to know
that an identical event actually occurred in April
1996 when I was the Speaker, and
it fell upon me to inform the National Electoral Commission,
that several vacancies had occurred in the seats of elected members of the National Assembly, as a result of all
the CUF MPS having failed to attend three consecutive meetings of the
House without the Speaker’s permission, just because their Party had ordered
them to boycott all meetings of the House.
Source: Daily News and Cde Msekwa himself.
