Friday, April 26, 2019

What to Make of the Weak Parliament?

What to make of Ndugai-led Parliament?

By Frank Khelef

When the former secretary of the National Assembly Dr Thomas Kashilillah announced in November 2015 that Mr Job Ndugai was going to be the seventh Speaker of the eleventh Parliament, a burst of applause from lawmakers and other guests in the house floor accompanied the announcement.

Mr Ndugai had garnered 254 votes out of a total 365 votes cast, beating his closest opponent Mr Goodluck Ole-Medeye then from the opposition Chadema by votes. Mr Ole-Medeye got 109 votes. Two votes were rejected.
 Mr Ndugai, the Kongwa MP (CCM) who had served as the deputy speaker in the previous Parliament, was very brief in his plea for votes. He had, after all, laid his own bed. A question by a special seat MP on whether Mr Ndugai would repeat his “authoritarianism” that he applied when serving as deputy speaker was curtly dismissed then.

And yet, Mr Ndugai was very calm and composed during his acceptance speech, saying that he understood the power entrusted to him. “I know the conditions of most Tanzanians. I know their needs. I know their expectations,” he said. “I know the position that this body holds in helping Tanzanians get rid of their present conditions. I know that we are supposed to be as a good advisor of the fifth phase government as its supervisor,” he stressed.
But four years into the position, how has Mr Ndugai fared on his office assumption pledges?
At the time of writing, Mr Ndugai is involved in an uncalled for wrangle with the Controller and Auditor General (CAG), Prof Mussa Assad, over the latter’s “weak Parliament” remarks. The statement brought Prof Assad before the Parliamentary Privileges, Ethics and Powers Committee whose findings saw the Parliament pass a resolution not to work with him indefinitely.

Mr Ndugai was angered that the CAG told a journalist during a UN conference in New York that the Parliament had failed to enforce the government’s accountability. His remarks were mainly on how the House has responded to the annual CAG recommendations. Mr Ndugai interpreted the CAG’s remarks as an assault on the integrity of the House that he leads. He has gone far and even demanded that Prof Assad resigns.
The unfolding situation raises a number of issues that brings to question not just Mr Ndugai’s capabilities as a Speaker, but also his integrity as a leader. While Prof Assad has explained that his remarks were ordinary accounting terminology, the Speaker remains insistence that the CAG acted in bad faith and brought the Parliament into disrepute. He dragged in the name of the President from whom he told the CAG to seek forgiveness.
When all is said and done, it appears that the CAG won the battle on the court of public onion, with netizens even signing an online petition against the Parliament’s resolution.
And the focus on Parliament could not have come at the worst time – the release of the 2017/18 CAG report, with findings appearing to bolster the stance by Prof Assad that the House has lagged behind in demanding accountability on the gaps identified in past reports.
In my assessment, Mr Ndugai’s weakness did not start to show with the CAG’s report. It started when the government banned live coverage of Parliament on account of time spent by the public to watch the debates by. MPs. Despite the uproar and stiff opposition from almost every corner of the country, the ban was endorsed under the watch of Mr Ndugai. The implications of this selfish move are a topic for another discussion but suffice it to say that it has contributed a great deal in leaving Tanzanians in the darkness, knowing little about how their representatives are doing.
It is also under Mr Ndugai that Parliament has enacted several laws that have roundly been condemned as being detrimental to the country’s nascent democracy. From the Statistics Act that makes it a crime to publish statistical evidence that is not government-approved, the Media Services Act which also criminalises the work of journalists to the Orwellian Political Parties Act, the House does not lack in obvious shortcomings. In fact, the East African Court of Justice (EACJ) has roundly rejected key provisions of the new media law.
But, on the other hand, how did Parliament respond in instances of national crises, for example when innocent individuals were being shot dead in the Mkuranga, Kibiti and Rufiji (MKIRU) area along the coast? Didn’t Ndugai-led House rejects a call by Kigoma Urban MP Zitto Kabwe to debate the matter? What of the rejection of CCM’s Hussein Bashe call to probe a shadowy security team that had been linked to a spate of abductions and threats to people seen as critics of the government?
My take is Mr Ndugai’s parliament has performed poorly and continue to act to only perpetuate selfish political interests against what would be the larger public interest. He has not hesitated to demonstrate that he would stop at nothing to protect the government which he promised to hold to account.
More than once the opposition in the parliament has failed to table an alternative budget in the house after having its original report edited to the extent of alteration of its main points and issues that it tries to raise. This situation plays a big role in leaving Tanzanians on the darkness and deprive them of their rights to hear what the alternatives are and thus make informed decisions.
It is, therefore, no wonder that the public largely and readily sided with Prof Assad when it came to weighing on whose interest the standoff with Mr Ndugai was primed.  

Sunday, April 14, 2019

You Got Played Doctor!

You Got Played!

Mwanahamisi 'Mishy' Singano


I read Dr Ronald Ndesanjo's blog post on 'Who said the President doesn't listen?' with a lot of sadness and anger. Not because he excitedly joined the praising team, praising ‘the almighty’ for ‘listening.’ But because his praises shows how much we are starved of sensible decisions to the extent that any seemingly positive move of a card can be claimed as victory, making learned brothers jump up and down with joy. I am so sad!

According to the Oxford Dictionary, "listening" is giving attention to sound or action. When listening, you are hearing what others are saying, and trying to understand what they mean. The act of listening therefore involves "complex affective, cognitive, and behavioral processes." In this sense, affective processes include the motivation to listen to others; cognitive processes include attending to, understanding, receiving, and interpreting content and relational messages; and behavioral processes include responding to others with verbal and nonverbal feedback (Ibid.)

The claim that the president is finally listening is self-pleasing at most and illusive at very least. What we have constantly seen is someone who has been very clear in his intent and allegiance, mastering the art of ‘playing others’ to push his agenda or just for fun. And, like many who have been played before, Dr Ndesanjo, is the latest member of the clan who seems to enjoy the game as he openly share his praises. 

How I wish the Dr could recite Kamwaga's take on how the President uses ‘Confusion as a Strategy.’ Or even revisit my previous piece on ‘The Genius of my President' before getting carried away. If you ask me, being a listener (in a conversational way), and being environmentalist and apologetic are not qualities that can be associated with his name.

While Dr Ndesanjo is overjoyed by the Namtumbo speech made on the 5th of April when the President, ‘bluntly’, as the Dr has aptly put it, informed the villagers that they will not be allowed to farm in the Selous Game Reserve in the name of conserving the environment, on the 9th of April, the same President went back to his normal rhetoric of shaming and slamming environmental agencies for making ‘things hard for investors.’ Bragging of his position as the President, he told all investors listening to him that they should start the construction of their factories as soon as they have acquired the land without waiting for Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs), which, as we know, are an international compliance prerequisites. What a swift, agile contradiction!

He, Mr. President, said to the National Environmental Management Council (NEMC) ‘Liaridhi umelikuta hapo limeumbwa na Mungu unataka kupima mazingira ya namna gani?’ By this, he meant that 'one has already found land there created by God then you want to to assess what kind of environment?' It was another jab at EIAs.

The President tends to believe that environmentalists are blocking his industrialization agenda and the 9th April's speech proved just that. So, going back to Dr. Ndesanjo's claims that the President listens, does he feel victorious when farmers in Namtumbo are pushed away in the name of the environment while industrialists are given blanket rights to use and abuse our environment as they see fit? If at all he ‘listens’, as claimed, who does he listen to? 

Are ‘power, class, and race’ ingredients to be listened to? I am also interested to know about the life span of his decisions and actions (i.e. consistency) for us to conclude that he final got it. Should we say he listened on the 5th of April and 'unlistened' on the 9th of April? I am confused!

Lastly, on Koro-show, how on earth could a decision of ‘paying Kangomba’ be a victory and a powerful indicator than ‘he listens’ and hence political scientists who have criticized him for not listening should go back to the drawing board? Or are you among those who imagined Kangomba are 'belled brown Indian men'? No, the majority of Kangomba are ordinary Tanzanians like you and me who trying to squeeze some profits by playing a role in a value chain and, like in any business, they come in different size and shape.

The government had no any other option than paying the people who have handed over the nuts to authorities whether they are Kangomba or not. Not paying them would be ‘looting’. The so called verification exercise to identify real farmers was comical and a waste of the little resources Local Government Authorities (LGAs) had.

Koro-show problems are bigger than Kangomba. The President has been advised multiple times. And the flows on every decisions he and his team have made are widely known to the public. It is public knowledge that the mission to emerge as a hero in the Koro-show saga has backfired. His mission has proved to be impossible and farmers are paying a high price for that. Yet he continues to hold the hope and brag that he has enough money to pay the Kangomba while some of the farmers who are verified (based on their standards) are not paid yet.

A leader who listens would humbly abort the heroic mission. But, no, he choose to play it. And, lucky him, Dr Ndesanjo got played.

Who said President Magufuli Doesn’t listen?

Who said the President doesn’t listen?

By 

Ronald B. Ndesanjo


During his recent tour in Southern Tanzania, HE President John Pombe Magufuli made some statements that might get critical political analysts back on the drawing board to try and reconstruct their impression of this interesting political figure in the region. He gave some statements that I would regard as contrary to his previous stance. In this blog post I will focus on just two: the settlement of outstanding cashew nut farmers’ payments and the country’s natural resource conservation agenda. I posit that the President actually listens and is ready to reverse his decisions contrary to what some have regarded him: a doctrinaire. 

But the big question is: Who does he listen to and what gets him to listen?
What I was not expecting to hear is a directive that even once the government’s arch-enemy, the middle persons (alias Kangomba), were to be included in the payment from the government to cashew nut holders whom it still owes money to. This apparent-about turn caught many critical observers by surprise. But, first, how did we get here?

In November 2018 the government got into a row with dealers, including middle persons and big buyers, over cashew nut prices to be paid to farmers. When it was certain that business people were not going to yield to the government’s pressure that they should buy the nuts for not less than TZS 3000 per a kilo, the government made a difficult decision to procure the whole of that season’s yield; 200,000 tons of nuts at TZS 3300 per kilo. The Tanzania Agricultural Development Bank (TADB) was mandated with the task of coughing the money and the military with taking care of logistics and part of the processing. 
This made it very clear that traditional cashew nut dealers, particularly middle persons (Kangomba) and big buyers, were cut off from the cashew nut supply/value chain. It was “good news” that farmers were finally off the talons of predatory business people whose key interest is profit maximization at the expense of the sweat of a poor farmer. Just to show how serious the government was, the military and agricultural officers were ordered to verify even the farms where a given consignment originated from. 
Then things started to go awry. The verification exercise become complicated. Farmers started complaining about delayed payments and that life was getting harder because they couldn't meet their pressing needs, including that of taking their children to school. They even wished for the Kangomba to resume business since they pay timely, albeit peanuts. 
Things were happening so quickly and simultaneously. At one point we could even hear the government pleading to businesspeople to come and do business. In another instance, we witnessed the controversial signing of a contract with a Kenyan firm, Indo Power Solutions Ltd, that had expressed wish to buy 100,000 tons of the cashew nuts. 

The climax is possibly what has happened recently when the President was touring the southern regions of Lindi, Mtwara and Ruvuma. It became very clear that he has decided to reverse his decision and offered a compromise by ordering inclusion in the remaining payments of all those who were holding the nuts, whether they are farmers or not. We were even told that TZS 50 billion was already on its way to the south for paying 18,303 farmers and much more would be pouring in until all those with nuts in holding have been paid. 
Cashew nuts aside, the President demonstrated yet another unexpected stance when speaking with the masses in Namtumbo District on the 5th of April. He bluntly made it explicitly clear that he was not going to order part of Selous Game Reserve, a United Nations Education, Science and Cultural Organization’s (UNESCO) World Heritage Site, to be made open to farming by villagers who had requested it. He explained his position by reminding them on the importance of conservation to national economic growth through tourism, i.e. the biggest contributor to the country's Gross Domestic Production (GDP). The President stressed that efforts to conserve our wildlife and natural resources began even before independence and were then spearheaded by Mwalimu Nyerere (the First President of Tanzania).

One might recall that in January 2019, President Magufuli ordered responsible ministries to formally recognize 366 villages falling within protected areas across the country. He added that herders and farmers should not be harassed. As if that was not enough, government authorities were told to take stock of all Protected Areas (PAs) to identify those with no wildlife or forests so that they can be opened for people to farm and graze. 
To conservationists this came as a blow given resources that have been invested to conserve our wildlife and natural resources. I have no reason to believe that the 366 villages were wrongly deemed to have encroached into PAs despite the fact that PAs’ custodians (and the state at large) have been accused of gross violations since colonial times. But this a story for another day. 

For the villagers the country over, this was wonderful news. Some even demonstrated to hail President Magufuli and bestowed him with gifts for a gesture they haven’t seen since independence. But the main question remains: What has really led to these antagonistic positions by the President? 

I think one important aspect that the government overlooked (or just chose to ignore) is the fact that middle persons - Kangomba - in the cashew nut value/supply chain play a critical role in keeping the industry afloat. Since they have liquidity, they are the ones who have always enabled farmers’ access to highly needed inputs and other farm requirements until they harvest and pay back the dues based on terms agreed upon between the two parties. This might equate to what government subsidy could have done to the farmers had it been actively involved with them all along the chain rather than showing up only when harvests are due. 
No wonder whenever the government intervenes in crop markets most of the farmers question where it has been all that time when they were breaking their backs in the fields with no substantial support. I cannot say with certainty that this is indeed the actual reason the President finally became considerate and changed his mind recently. But who knows? 

I have vested interest in the country’s conservation agenda, so, let me say a little more in connection to the President’s statement in Namtumbo. Admittedly, I was moved by it. But, going back to the January 2019's order, I am left wondering what exactly does it imply to years of conservation efforts. 
As a country, we formulated policies and enacted laws that discourage and criminalize extractive human activities in PAs. I must admit this is a sacrifice we made as far as local livelihoods are concerned. But it is a choice we have deliberately made for greater good. Plans to rid our PAs of human extractive activities are implemented according to policies and regulatory frameworks we sanely passed for posterity. That aside, a lot of resources -- human, financial and time -- went into conservation.
The Namtumbo statement also left me wondering whether expansion of farming and livestock grazing is the only threat to our conservation agenda. This took me back to one of the current administration’s flagship development projects; the Rufiji Hydropower Project at Stiegler's Gorge expected to generate 2100MW of electricity when fully operational. As I have noted in one of my previous blog posts, this is indeed good news given our ambitious industrialization and infrastructure led development. 

However, to the national conservation agenda, this was a huge disappointment. It might even turn out to be the greatest environmental blunder this administration will be remembered for. Why? Because the Rufiji Hydropower Project is implemented right inside the Selous Game Reserve, a World Heritage Site since 1982. 
When Tanzania ratified the Convention Concerning the Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage, it agreed to conditions that came with it, including not to undertake any development activities within the Selous Game Reserve and its buffer zone. It came as a surprise, therefore, that Tanzania has plans to implement the project contrary to an agreement we entered into with UNESCO. What ensued thereafter was a hot exchange between project proponents lead by the government of Tanzania and pro-conservation groups led by UNESCO. 

Conservationists made a lot of noise about long-term negative impacts of the project on social and ecological systems. It should be noted that biodiversity conservation and livelihood sustenance downstream the project were part of the reasons that led to failure of the project to take off during Mwalimu Nyerere’s administration.
 But even now the sustainability of the project is not certain. Climate change is wreaking havoc with an increase in extreme events like droughts and flooding. This is intensifying water abstraction upstream, threatening sufficient water supply for the project. I cannot tell for sure whether these worrying environmental factors were considered or not during the project design, not least because of the contention over the comprehensiveness of its impact assessment(s).

Burning questions I keep asking myself in that regard are: What were we thinking then when we agreed as a country to enlist the Selous Game Reserve as UNESCO World Heritage Site? What were we thinking this time when we decided to dishonor that treaty and went ahead doing the contrary? For how long are we going to keep on disbanding commitments we willingly get into and what will be the long-term effects? 
I am not sure the President will ever back down from the Rufiji Hydropower Project for the sake of heritage and conservation. We have been told that the project will be implemented come sun come rain. Contractors are even already on site and construction work is underway. 

So, I only pray that we don’t discover gold deposits in the Serengeti and Tanzanite on Mount Kilimanjaro. Or oil and gas in the Ngorongoro Crater. Fore sure, there were several alternative energy sources we could have sought but only one Selous Game Reserve; once gone it’ll be gone forever.

Critics of President Magufuli’s leadership style have accused him of not being a good listener but the incidents I have cited in this blog post prove them wrong. The President listens. He hears very well. 
He listened to the poor cashew nut farmers and dealers. Now they all will be paid. The President heard that unregulated human activities like farming jeopardize our conservation efforts and heritage. What matters, then, is who does he listen to and what does he hear?

Saturday, April 13, 2019

Iko wapi Diplomasia katika “Diplomasia ya Uchumi”?

Iko wapi Diplomasia katika “Diplomasia ya Uchumi”?

Dastan Kweka



Kiutaratibu, sera ya mambo ya nje ya nchi ni mwendelezo wa sera ya mambo ya ndani, na huainisha kanuni na misingi ambayo huongoza dola husika katika kujenga mahusiano na nchi nyingine, kukuza ushawishi, na kutetea maslahi yake. Pia, sera ya mambo ya nje, kama zilivyo sera nyinginezo, hupaswa kubadilika ili iendane na muktadha, kwa mfano; mabadiliko – ya ndani au ya nje - katika fikra, mienendo, au mitazamo.

Nchi yetu imeshuhudia mabadiliko makubwa ya kiutawala katika kipindi cha takribani miaka mitatu, tangu serikali ya awamu ya tano iingie madarakani. Mabadiliko ambayo siyo tu yameathiri utekelezaji wa sera ya mambo ya nje ya Taifa letu, bali yanaashiria mwelekeo mpya kabisa wa kisera. Lengo la makala haya ni kuainisha nakisi iliyopo katika utekelezaji wa sera hiyo, kwa lengo la kuonesha wapi panahitaji maboresho.
 
Sera ya Taifa ya Mambo ya Nje, toleo la mwaka 2001, imesimikwa katika dhana ya “diplomasia ya uchumi” -  dhana yenye lengo la kuhakikisha kuwa, mbali na malengo mengine, mfano ya kiulinzi, shughuli za kidiplomasia zinazoendeshwa na nchi yetu zinajikita katika kuujenga na kuuimarisha uchumi wetu. Utekelezaji wa sera hii, ambayo imekuwepo kwa karibia miongo miwili sasa, ulipaswa kuimarisha misingi muhimu ya “sera ya asili” ya mambo ya nje ya Tanzania, huku ukiongozwa na kanuni kadhaa, ikiwemo ya kulinda uhuru wa Taifa, haki za binadamu, na usawa na demokrasia (Ukurasa wa 11).

Sera ya asili ya Mambo ya Nje ilikuwa na misingi yake - “fundamental principles of Tanzania`s foreign policy” - ambayo ni ile iliyokuwa katika sera ya mambo ya nje ya serikali ya awamu ya kwanza, na ilihusisha kuunga mkono juhudi za kujikomboa za watu, na mataifa yanayoonewa. Usimamizi thabiti wa msingi au kanuni hii, na nyinginezo, hasa wakati wa harakati za uhuru, na vita vya ukombozi, uliipatia Tanzania heshima kubwa Afrika, na duniani. Hata hivyo, ni wazi kuwa ingawa sera ya sasa ya mambo ya nje imeainisha haja ya kuimarisha misingi hiyo ya asili, kuna ushahidi wa wazi kuwa imeshatelekezwa. 

Kwa mfano, tumeona Tanzania ikianzishamahusiano ya kibalozi na Israeli, na kujivuniakupokea watalii kutoka nchi hiyo, huku mgogoro baina ya nchi hiyo na Mamlaka ya Palestina ukibaki kuwa kitendawili. Pia, tumeona nchi yetu ikiimarishamahusiano na nchi ya Morocco, na kupokea misaada kadhaa, huku suala la Sahara Magharibi likibaki bila ufumbuzi. Tafsiri ya dhana ya diplomasia ya uchumi, katika muktadha wa mabadiliko haya, ni kuwa, yeyote mwenye fedha, teknolojia, au kingine chochote tunachokihitaji, hata akiwa dhalimu, ni swahiba wetu. 

Hoja ya msingi kuhusu kubadilika kwa mahusiano baina ya nchi yetu na Israeli, au Morocco, siyo mabadiliko peke yake. Mabadiliko haya yangeweza kuwa muhimu, kwa mfano, kama yangejikita kwenye haja ya kubadili mbinu. Ajabu ni kuwa, tunaambiwa mabadiliko haya ni muhimu kwa sababu za kiuchumi, basi. Ni kama vile, kwa kuimarisha mahusiano na nchi hizi hali yetu kiuchumi itaboreka kabisa. Ajabu!

Mwenendo wa utekelezaji wa sera yetu ya mambo ya nje unaonesha kuwa, watawala wanadhani inawezekana, na ni sawa, kwa dola kusukuma ajenda zake katika ngazi ya kimataifa, bila kulazimika, au kulazimishwa, kuheshimu misingi na kanuni muhimu, hata zile ambazo Taifa limejiwekea lenyewe katika sheria na sera zake. Kwa mfano, mojawapo ya kanuni ya msingi  katika sera yetu ya mambo ya nje inahusu ulinzi wa uhuru, haki za binadamu, usawa na demokrasia. Bila shaka, kanuni hii ina msingi wake katika Katiba ya nchi yetu (1977). Kwa hiyo, tumeiambia dunia kuwa hii ndiyo misingi tunayoiheshimu na kuithamini. 

Ajabu ni kuwa, serikali inatarajia jamii ya kimataifa ikae kimya pale inapoonekana kukiuka misingi hii, na kutowajibika kwa namna yoyote ile, hata pale baadhi ya miili ya raia wake inapoibuka baharini, kutekwa, au kunusurika kifo katika mashambulio mbalimbali. Sikitiko ni kuwa, nchi ambayo kwa miaka mingi ilifahamika kwa kukemea uovu, uonevu na ukandamizaji uliofanywa na mataifa ya Magharibi, hasa nyakati za ukoloni, sasa imegeuka ya kukemewa kupitia (ma)azimioyatolewayo na jamii ya kimataifa, ikiwemo Jumuiya ya Umoja wa Ulaya. Mkemeaji amegeuka mkemewaji. 

Historia inaonesha kuwa, suala la haki za binadamu limetumiwa mara kadhaa na mataifa yenye nguvu duniani kuingilia uhuru wa nchi nyingine, hasa zinazoendelea, na kuleta dhahama kubwa. Mfano mzuri, na unaopendwa na “viongozi” wetu, ni Libya. Jumuiya ya Kimataifa imeweka misingi ya kuingilia uhuru wa nchi nyingine, hasa pale ambapo waliopewa mamlaka wameshindwa, au hawana motisha ya kusimamia haki za watu wanaowaongoza. Na, hatua za mwanzo za kuingilia uhuru huanza kwa maazimio, yakiwa na lengo la kujenga uhalali wa hatua zaidi. Madhara ya maazimio ni kumomonyoa heshima ya nchi, na ushawishi wake, ikiwemo katika nyanja za kiuchumi. 

Wakati fulani katika historia, Tanzania ilikua Taifa masikini, lakini ambalo lilipata heshima kubwa kwa kusimamia utu na haki, na kupinga uonevu na udhalilishaji. Tulipaswa kuendelea kusimamia misingi hii, ndani na nje, huku tukiweka juhudi katika kujenga nguvu yetu ya kiuchumi. Kwa kukanyaga misingi hii, Taifa limefungua milango ya kuingiliwa, kubezwa ama kubagazwa, na kupuuzwa. 

Mwanzoni mwa miaka ya sitini, Mwalimu Nyerere alitoa muongozo maarufu wa kisera juu ya namna ya kushughulika na sera ya mambo ya nje, uliokuwa na jina la kimombo, “Argue, Don’t Shout.” Tafsiri isiyo rasmi ni, “Jenga hoja, Usipayuke.” Katika utangulizi wa muongozo huo (ukurasa wa 11), yaliandikwa yafuatayo (nanukuu);

 “Tunataka ama kushawishi watu, au kuwafanya waelewe ni kwa nini tumechagua mwelekeo fulani. Na kwa yoyote kati ya malengo haya, tunapaswa kujenga hoja, siyo kupayuka.” (Tafsiri yangu, ukurasa wa 11).

Kuna dalili za wazi kuwa, kama Taifa tumeanza “kupayuka”, badala ya kujenga hoja. Mfano mzuri ni namna ambavyo nchi imekabiliana na madukuduku ya jumuiya ya kimataifa juu ya hali ya haki za binadamu, uhuru wa kujieleza, kujumuika na kukusanyika. Hatua ya kumfukuza balozi wa Umoja wa Ulaya nchini ilifuatiwa na taarifa nyingi zenye mwenendo wa kubomoa jina, na hadhi ya nchi. Majibu yetu yakawa duni, na yasiyojitosheleza. Kimsingi, ni hatua iliyoishia kudhoofisha mahusiano, na jina la nchi. Ni mgogoro wa kidiplomasia ulioanzishwa wakati ambao nafasi ya nchi kidiplomasia ni duni kabisa.

Tatizo kubwa katika utekelezaji wa sera ya mambo ya nje, kwa sasa, ni mkanganyiko (contradictions) kati ya hatua ambazo taifa linachukua, na malengo ambayo linataka kufikia. Kwa mfano, wakati tunadai hizi ni zama za diplomasia ya uchumi, ushiriki wa Taifa letu katika diplomasia ndani ya bara letu, na hata nje, unafanyika zaidi katika ngazi “za chini”, yaani waziri, na mabalozi. Kwa uwiano, ni mara chache unahusisha Rais, Waziri Mkuu au Makamu wa Rais. 
 
Athari ya aina hii ya utendaji imekua ni kutuma ujumbe, kwa jamii ya kimataifa, kuwa nchi yetu haioni umuhimu wa kuweka mkazo katika muhusiano, na kwamba siyo ya kutegemewa, kama ilivyokuwa zamani. Na ndivyo ilivyo; nchi yetu kwa sasa inaangalia ndani zaidi(inward looking), na imeacha ombwe la uongozi katika jamii ya kimataifa, ikiwemo katika Jumuiya ya Maendeleo Kusini mwa Afrika (SADC) na ndani ya Jumuiya ya Afrika Mashariki (EAC). Na, sababu ni kuwa kiitikadi (soma misingi, lugha isiyo na ukakasi), tumeyumba.

Mfano mwingine wa mkanganyiko unaonekana katika nia ya taifa letu kujiimarisha kama ushoroba wa biashara katika ukanda wa maziwa makuu, kwa upande mmoja, na namna ilivyokabiliana na mgogoro wa Burundi, kwa upande mwingine. Ushiriki, na juhudi za usuluhishi za Rais mstaafu, Benjamin Mkapa, zimedunishwa sana na mwenendo wa mahusiano ya nchi yetu na Rwanda. Diplomasia ya uchumi, katika muktadha huu, ilipaswa kuhusisha taifa letu kujitanabahisha kuwa liko juu ya mgogoro husika.

Kuna changamoto za kimkakati pia. Kwa mfano, watawala walitangaza “vita ya kiuchumi” katika wakati ambao pia wanaonekana kuazimia kuweka mkazo katika diplomasia ya uchumi. Tatizo ni kuwa, vita ya kiuchumi inadunisha, au kufuta kabisa (negate) juhudi kiduchu za diplomasia ya uchumi. Haiwezekani kuendesha vita ya kiuchumi nyumbani, na diplomasia ya uchumi ugenini, na usitarajie madhara (hasi). Hili siyo suala la mapungufu kuhusu uzuri, au ukuu wa lengo, bali nakisi katika mbinu. 

Tanzania, chini ya serikali ya awamu ya tano, ina malengo makubwa, na yenye kutia shauku. Changamoto kuu katika kufikia malengo hayo, hasa katika nyanja ya sera ya mambo ya nje, ni mkanganyiko katika utekelezaji wa sera hiyo. Mkanganyiko huu ni mkubwa kiasi kwamba sisi tunaotazama kutoka pembeni tunashindwa kuiona diplomasia katika inayoitwa diplomasia ya uchumi.

Usonga Unyagoni

Unyagoni

Mwanahamisi 'Mishy' Singano


Basi bwana…. mapenzi yakawa mahaba, tukasema, mbona twajinyima, hatulali tukaamka, hatupiki, tukapakua, twajipa wasiwasi na wahka, kwa nini tusioane? Naammm…. Familia zikajua, hapo ndiyo utamu ulipoanza, nilipoyajua ya usungo na ya utangani…. 

Pirika zikaanza, posa ikakabidhiwa, haaa-madi…. Kumbe ni barua, yeye maneno yaliyoyoonyoka, “Familia ya Bwana Fulani, yatakumuoa bint yako Fulani.”Hapo ndipo nilipojua, kumbe naolewa na familia siyo ‘bwana flani’, hilo moja. Kilichonishangaza, ni kuwa, barua hiyo ilifungwa na hela, ikatiwa kwenye bahasha, bahasha ikafungwa na leso, na kukaziwa na pini zile za zamani. 

Walai sijapata maana ya yakini  mpaka leo hii, ila mjomba wangu mie, wakati ule, aliniambia kuwa, kwanza barua hufungwa hivyo ili kutofautisha, na barua nyingine kwa kuwa barua ya posa lazima ifunguliwe na watu wanaostahili, lakini pesa – ambazo hazirudishwi (nonrefundable), ni kulipia gharama za upofu (maana kusoma kunatia upofu ati) - nami nilicheka kama wewe. Lakini leso ni kwa ajili ya babu kujifuta jasho na machozi ya hamaki na furaha kwa kuibiwa mke wake (muolewaji) na pini ni ya kumpa bibi, kukazia mkaja wake.

Mapokezi ya posa huja na maulizo ya muolewaji, nami nikawajibu ‘are you kidding me?’ yes, nataka kuolewa…. vigelegele vikapigwa, shangwe na nderemo, thenwazee wakakaa kama kamati, kuandaa mahari…. Shughuli haikuwa ndogo, mana mie ni mixture, ya msambaa, mdigo, mbondei na mzigua…. Na ilibidi wakubaliane mfumo wa mahari yangu… Kisambaa, jamaa alitakiwa anivizie nimelala kwenye nyumba ya baba yangu na kuja kunibeba usiku wa manane – yes, kuniteka kind of, ila wangefunga mbuzi nje kuelezea aina ya utekaji na asubuhi, familia yake ingekuja na mali kujitambulisha, ‘Kughuigwa’ Kizigua.

List ya mahari lazima iwe kubwa mno kwa sababu, waoaji wana haki ya kutoa gharama walizotumia kipindi chote cha uchumba, oh yes, kama niliwahi kulala kwake na nikanywa chai, that laki moja down,  kama alinihonga hela ya wigi, that laki mbili down, so at the end, inawezekana kabisa familia ya mke ndio itatakiwa iwalipe waoaji, so strategically, inabidi watoe bonge la bili, ili hata wakikata… hasa kwa binti kama mie ambaye sisomeki, stillwazee wabaki na chochote. Kwa kidogo, mahari ni security ya mwanamke, kwa hiyo, furniture za ndani kwao ni bora zaidi ili mume akifikiria kukuacha anajiuliza mara mbili kama yuko tayari kulala chini, maana utaondoka na vitanda na makochi yote, anyways… list ikatengenezwa, mahari ikajaa kurasa ya A4, jogoo, mbuzi, mche wa sabuni  na kuendelea… 

Utamu ukaja mimi, kukataa kulipiwa mambo ya kimila na kuuzwa… ‘the feminist in me, timbwili lake halikuwa dogo, ila mwisho wa siku nikaambiwa mahari inabidi ilipwe na haitakiwi kulipwa yote – ni amri siyo ombi! Mumeo atamalizia hiyo mahari siku atakayokuacha…I was like …. why? Bibi akaniambia, kidini hatakiwi kukuacha kabla hajamaliza mahari na kimila hatupokei mahari yote, na lengo ni kumfanya mume, afikirie ‘gharama’ ya kukuacha, nikatoa mimacho…. Nikavuta pumzi, nikauliza, je mimi nikitaka kumuacha? Nikaambiwa itanipasa nimlipe mahari yake aliyonilipia… I decided to go cheap, just in case … Ha ha ha.… anyway… hili la mahari tutaliongea next time….

Now that, nshalipiwa … haloooo! ni muda wa kuandaliwa, kwenda kumliwaza bwana… wakatafutwa masomo na manyakanga, mwali nikaingizwa unyagoni. Samahani somo yangu… nausokorotora unyago… kwa leo tu…

Bi dada nikachukuliwa kupelekwa unyagoni….nikisindikizwa na wamama, vicheko na nderemo mie moyo wapitwa kama jipu la kisigino… Kufika kwa somo, ngoma zikakazana, somo akanijia… nimefunikwa gubigubi… huku wakiimba kwa furaha na hamasa… njoo nae mwari wako njoo nae… hakuna mwari asiye na somo, njoo naye…. Mpaka katikati, kuinua kichwa nimezungukwa na manyakanga wasiopungua 50, kufa nataka kuishi nakutamani…. Nikasema courage Mishy! Sasa si wakaanza kunivua nguo moja baada ya nyengine (kikundi cha manyakanga kama watano hivi walinizunguka) wengine wakiwa busy na nyimbo, na ngoma na vigelegele…. At that time, nikuwa nusu mtu nusu marehemu…. Kutahamaki nimefungwa upande wa kanga nikawekwa chini – katikati. 

Kwanza nikafundishwa salaam, kuwasalimia wale tu waliochezwa kabla yangu, nikapiga magoti, nikaweka mikono nyuma, na kuinamisha kichwa, ili wanibariki kichwani… nikatambaa na magoti kuwasalimu wote… isipokuwa wale ambao hawakuchezwa.  Nikarejea katikati ya kilinge (kwa magoti), nikaa kitako, miguu nimenyoosha… kichwa nimeweka chini, umwari haswa…. by that time, I felt empty, walinivua umimi wangu.. nikabaki debe tupu.

In the middle of that…. wakakaribishwa mama na mashangazi, kuwaambia manyakanga maovu na mapungufu yangu ili manyakanga… wanifix… ule msemo wa samaki mkunje angali mbichi, it’s a lie, mie nilikunjwa nikakauka kabisa. Wakaanza kuongea…. man…. that was tough… yaani wale wazee walinisema niliyoyajua na nisiyoyajua, yaliyowaumiza na nayowakwaza, sasa sikwambii masomo walivyokuwa wanashadadia na kunisuta… and I should have said, unyago huu ulifanyika Kariakoo.... So you could imagine…. Nilichambwaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa mpaka nikapauka. 

Then nikaamriwa kutambaa na magoti na kwenda kuwaomba msamaha wazee wangu ‘Wanisafie nia’ Nakumbuka Nyakanga wangu akinambia, Mishy, bila radhi za wazee wako, hata ukabinuke sarakasi za Bruce Lee huko kwa mumeo, ndoa yako haiwezi kuwa na amani…so I did… nikalia, nikatubu na kamasi zikatoka… I wished, nami wangenipa nafasi ya kusema yangu, ila mie ni mwari nilipaswa tu kusikiliza na kutubu, never the less, it was a healing moment for me…

Baada ya vilio, michambo na misamaha, manju akauchachua msondo. Kwa mujibu wao, hii ilikuwa demo kuwaonesha familia kuwa, binti yao yuko mikono salama, na nitafundwa na kufundika. Nyakanga akalala chini, nami nikalala ubavu, mikono nyuma, ushanga mdomoni, huku kiuno kikifata mdundo wa ‘mkuno wa nazi mkuno, kunia pembeni, kunia chini, kunia katikati, kunia juu.’Nikaanza kuokota mizungu. 

Mmoja wa manyakanga alikuwa na fimbo mkononi, ukitegea, umechapwa nayo ya mgongo, nikajikaza kuchezesha kiuno, nikaambiwa, ‘usilete kiuno cha ndombolo, utaivunja! Kata taratibu, kifeel, kisiklizie, ringa nacho, jishaue kitandani ndiyo mahala pekee ambapo ni mali yako, own it... Hapo ndipo kazi ilipoanza… 

Nilikaa unyagoni kwa siku nane – haya yalikuwa mapokezi tu.. tuonane next weekend nikujuze yaliyojiri siku ya kwanza… and mind you siku zote nane, nililazwa sakafuni kwenye mkeka… nikauliza mbona mwantesa? Nikajibiwa, “Mume aumaaa…. Kwa mateso haya… hutomtoa mumeo sadaka!”  Nikahamaki…

Political Parties Act: A Blessing for Women & PWDs?


Is the New Political Parties (Amendment) Act, 2019 a blessing for Women and PWDs? 

Fears, worries and concerns on the implications of Political Parties (Amendment Act), 2019 (PPA Amendment) on the state of multiparty and competitive democracy in Tanzania are well documented.ii  After all is said and done, the registrar of political parties (RPP) communicated to the public that the PPA Amendment is now operational.iii As the new Act puts forth additional provisionsiv to regulate political parties which are the main gatekeepers of elections, a critical analysis on its implication in promoting meaningful participation of women and people with disabilities (PWDs) in electoral politics is of utmost importance.

With the new PPA Amendment, no political party shall qualify for provisional registration unless ‘its membership is voluntary and open to all the citizens of the United Republic without discrimination on account of… gender and disability.’ Although the RPP supervises the administration and implementation of the Act,the new law provides little guidance on how the registrar will measure compliance of gender and social inclusion provisions in deciding whether to grant provisional registration. The Act prohibits a person to form a political party if, within five years before making an application, that person has been sentenced or convicted on, among other things, offences relating to gender-based violence (GBV).vi It is noted that violence against women in elections and politicsvii is one of the main reasons for fewer women in electoral politics.

Knowing how extensive this topic can be, I will deliberately skip the problematic nature of the GBV provision for future analysis.

After getting provisional registration the political parties are required ‘to be managed by adhering to the Constitution of United Republic of Tanzania, Constitution of Zanzibar, this Act, political party’s constitution, principles of democracy, good governance, non-discrimination, gender and social inclusion.viii This provision also maintains silence on the benchmarks for measuring compliance to gender and social inclusion by political parties.
  
In course of its operation, political parties are required to ‘promote the union of the United Republic, Zanzibar Revolution, democracy, good governance, anti-corruption, national ethics, and core values, patriotism, secularism, uhuru torch, national peace and tranquility, peace, gender, youth, and social inclusion in the a) formulation and implementation of its policies, b) nomination of candidates for elections and c) election of its leaders.ixThis is a very progressive provision in promoting intra-party compliance to gender and social inclusion. It directs the RPP on the key aspects to scrutinize when determining compliance to gender and social inclusion by the political parties. 

 There are other roles that the RPP has which may be also used to enforce provisions on gender and social inclusion. The RPP may at any time call for any information from the political party in course of overseeing the implementation of the PPA.xThe information that may be demanded by the RPP may include party’s constitutions, guidelines, strategies and party registers on its members, party leaders, and leaders of the governing organs.xi

The RPP also monitors intra-party election and nomination process.xii As noted above, this role can be administered with a view to, among other things, check political parties compliance to gender and social inclusion provisions in its policies, leaders and candidates. But the issue of concern remains the same, what benchmarks or metrics will be used by the RPP to determine whether the political party has complied with the gender and social inclusion provisions.

Political Parties form their own leadership, formulate internal policies and set governance priorities. This places parties as strategic and crucial partner for furthering meaningful participation of women and PWDs in electoral politics.xiii To tap into that potential, and bearing in mind that most parties are some sort of ‘old boys club,’ international practices require the laws that govern political parties to include an indicative quota or number of women and PWDs that needs to be reflected in party’s leadership and candidates lists.xiv But, the new PPA Amendment contains general provisions on gender and social inclusion, without clear indication on the enforcement mechanisms.

Elsewhere, the new PPA Amendment requires political parties to be ‘formed to further the objectives and purposes that are not contradictory to the Constitution of United Republic of Tanzania,xvconstitution of Zanzibar and any other written law of the united republic.’xvi  The Constitution of the United Republic of Tanzania (CURT), 1977 covers different benchmarks in promoting gender inclusion in electoral politics. The popular and highly contested thirty per cent special seatsxvii and fifty per cent of women among the ten members of parliament appointed by the President are the key benchmarks. xviii

It is observed that across the Constitution, disability is mentioned only once as a consideration that the state authority needs to take and make appropriate provisions for realization of a person’s right to work, to self education, and social welfare.xix The other inference to PWDs inclusion in all aspects, and presumably in electoral politics, is found in the general equality and nondiscrimination provisions.xx Gender is also included therein.

As the PPA Amendment becomes operational, political parties are supposed to align party policies with the requirements of the new Act, including complying to the gender and social inclusion provisions.xxi The silence of PPA amendment on the level and extent of compliance, and the direction to further the objectives of the Constitution, provides the political parties with three constitutional options. First and second options are to amend their governing documents to provide either thirty or fifty percent of women in party leadership, and nomination of candidates in line with the Constitution. Third, maintaining or amending party policies to provide for general equality, nondiscrimination, gender and social inclusion provisions also in line with the Constitution. 

The first and second options can be easily dismissed by political parties by arguing that thirty and or fifty percent only applies to the parliament and enforced by National Electoral Commission or the President, respectively. And, thus, cannot guide intra-party election or nomination of candidates. Hence, parties are left with the freedom to end up with superficial, loose and hard to implement provisions on gender and social inclusion.

It should be noted that, since the beginning of multiparty politics in Tanzania and the commencement of the Political Parties Act 1992, political parties’ constitutions, manifestos, rules and regulations have been consistently silent with no meaningful provisions that advances effective participation of women and PWDs in electoral politics. Probably drafters of political parties’ policies were also crowded by the mentality I noted from one of the commentators from one of the notable human rights-based organizations in Tanzania. As he was leading a team in a joint analysis on key gaps in the proposed PPA, and when concerns that the analysis has not captured gender dynamics, the commentator confidently noted that the Act had nothing to do with gender and social inclusion, it is all about human rights and good governance. 

His remark got me back to my senses. It reminded me that patriarchy is real. Gender insensitive party policies have led to male-dominated-party-leadership positions, witnessed even within the ruling political party, Chama cha Mapinduzi (CCM), and key opposition parties such as Chama cha Demokrasia na Maendeleo (CHADEMA), Civic United Front (CUF) and Accountability for Transparency (ACT-Wazalendo).xxii As much as all candidates have to emerge from political parties as the only avenues for political participation, parties have become gatekeepers for accessing electoral posts. Gender insensitive political parties’ policies have also led to male-centered-party candidates’ nominations for electoral positions.xxiii 

There are incidences where women have failed to be nominated because of their gender or for other reasons which are, prima facie, to the eyes of reasonable men, gendered. When the political competition gets harder, women suffers two-fold. First, political parties tend to go for the strong candidates, and when this happens, men get a natural ill-founded preference.xxiv Second, in constituencies where party’s analysis depicts losing as a guarantee, political parties would just choose a woman candidate to carry the cross.xxv Despite the fact that political parties have many women as their followers, use women as mobilisers, fundraisers and campaigners,xxvi the women who are nominated to stand for elections usually get little moral and financial support.xxvii

The silence of PPA Amendment on quota or number of women and PWDs to be included in the party’s leadership and candidates’ nominations gives room for parties to decide how and to what extent they can comply with the provision on gender and social inclusion. With no compliance metric, political parties will just accept and keep in their register majority of women and PWDs as their members, put few of them in party leadership positions, and further fewer of them as candidates, with no meaningful integration  of gender and disability mainstreaming.xxviii As it has been noted above, this subtle superficiality is precedented.

Schedule I of the PPA Amendment already gives an indication that political parties will just do a superficial and cosmetic inclusion of women and PWDs. It is noted that, the proposed checklist for key provisions to be included in the political parties’ constitutions, does not include a provision on gender and social inclusion. This confirms that, on top of the silence of the PPA Amendment on the benchmarks for measuring gender and social inclusion compliance, the Act is not keen to guide the parties on how they should implement the gender and social inclusion provisions. It can only be speculated that Schedule I presumes that the gender and social inclusion provisions will be mainstreamed within the other clearly stipulated proposed provisions.xxix Not a very comprehensive strategy for an Act that governs political parties, which are mainly and originally male-dominated.

Financial support for women candidates is also reported as a great challenge for women to access electoral politics. As the registrar disburses and monitors accountability of government subventions and issue guidelines on the political parties’ income, expenditure and accountability of resources,xxx the envisaged Political Parties Regulations should stipulate clearly how such funds should be used to advance women and candidates with disabilities to have meaningful participation in electoral politics. This is not to affirm any undemocratic or dictatorial meddling of the internal affairs of political parties through the wide discretionary powers of the registrar, but to ensure that it is the rule of law that protects and promotes the participation of women and PWDs in such a patriarchal political system.

On the other hand, since the new PPA Amendment mentions disability for the first time, uses the words non-discrimination, gender and social inclusion, individuals and institutions will be excited to provide technical trainings and support the parties to mainstream gender and social inclusion provisions in the party’s policies, leadership and candidates’ nominations. In line with that, the PPA Amendment calls for early planning to ensure that the registrar is notified and has agreed to the training within 30 days after receiving the notification.xxxi Further, as the registrar provides and regulates civic education on multiparty democracy, research on political parties, party financing and multiparty democracy, xxxii intentional effort to ensure the designed civic education and research substantially includes issues for advancement of gender and PWDs inclusion as party’s members, leaders and candidates is necessary.

Finally, the role of the police force to protect, defend, and ensure safety in political meetings, not only for the sake of women and PWDs but for everyone, needs to be strengthened and guaranteed to all parties given that political parties are prohibited to hire or deploy militia of security groups.xxxiii In rounding it up, the new PPA Amendment aspires for parties to comply with gender and social inclusion provision but missed a golden chance to include metrics for enforcement. For easy enforcement of gender and social inclusion provisions, the registrar must, in the envisaged regulations, set metrics for assessing compliance, otherwise the new PPA Amendment will be a great disservice to women and PWDs.
                                                         
Governance and Political Advisor-Institutions for Inclusive Development (I4ID); A member of the Faculty of Law of the Open University of Tanzania (OUT). Available at victorialihiru@gmail.com and https://www.facebook.com/victoria.lihiru.


iii The PPA was passed by the government on 29th January 2019, assented by the President on 13th February 
2019, advertised in government gazette on 22nd February 2019.

iv The new PPA Amendment supplements the Political Parties Act [CAP 258 R.E. 2002], and they two should be read together as one. Section 1 of PPA Amendment.  

Section 3 (5) (a) of PPA Amendment.

vi Section 6 (B) (f) of PPA Amendment.

vii Refers to types of violence that exist in the exercise of political competition and governance in (at least nominally) democratic states and during democratization processes.

viii Section 6A (1) of PPA Amendment.

ix Section 6A (2) of PPA Amendment.

Section 5 (B) (1) of PPA Amendment.

xi Section 8C of PPA Amendment requires political parties to maintain register of their members, leaders of all administrative levels, and members of each of the party organ.

 xii Section 3 (5) (b) of PPA Amendment.

xiii Ballington, Julie. Expert Opinion: Strategies Used by Political Parties to Promote Women in Politics. iKNOW Politics. 2009. http://www.iknowpolitics.org/en/node/10028.

xiv Political Participation, accessed from https://www.un.org/womenwatch/osagi/wps/publication/Chapter3.htm on 7th April 2019.

xv Section 6 A (1).
xvi  For this brief analysis I will capitalize on the objectives of the Constitution of United Republic of Tanzania.
xvii Article 66 (1) (b) of the Constitution of United Republic of Tanzania Cap 2 RE 2002.
xviii Article 66 1) e), ibid.
xix Article 11 (1) ibid.
xx Article 12.-(1) ibid. All human beings are born free, and are all equal. (2) Every person is entitled to recognition and respect for his dignity. 13.-(1) All persons are equal before the law and are entitled, without any discrimination, to protection and equality before the law. Article 9 (g) and (h) requires Government and all its agencies accord equal opportunities to all citizens, men and women alike without regard to their colour, tribe, religion or station in life; (h) that all forms of injustice, intimidation, discrimination, corruption, oppression or favouritism are eradicated.
xxi Section 8 (D) of PPA Amendment, the registrar has mandate to look on the constitution of any political party, establish key gaps in line with the requirements of the Act, nature and reasons of the needed amendments and demand a political part to amendment within six months.
xxii In CCM, Chairperson, vice chairperson, party secretary, and party’s spokesperson are all men (Hon. President John Magufuli, Philip Mangula, Bashiru Ally, and Humphrey Polepole, respectively). The main opposition party leadership chairperson, vice chair, party secretary, party spokesperson, and chief whip are all men (Freeman Mbowe, Abdallah Safari, Vicent Mashinji, Tumaini Makene, and Tundu Lissu, respectively).

xxiii During 2015 general elections, there were 1,250 candidates (1,012 men, 238 women), accessed from http://archive.ipu.org/parline/reports/2337.htmon 7th April 2019.

xxiv This is well explained by the Tanzanian 2015 general election, where women aspirants faced additional challenges during the creation of the opposition parties’ coalition, known as Umoja ya Katiba ya Wananchi (UKAWA), when the main opposition parties and several other smaller opposition parties came together to field joint candidates. With the intention to win over the ruling party candidate, UKAWA felt extra pressure to field their best, most competitive candidate who had the highest chance of electoral victory and, as such, most male candidates were chosen over female candidates. In the Segerea Constituency, for example, it was agreed in UKAWA internal meetings that the candidate for the CUF, Mr. Julius Mtatiro, should be the flag bearer instead of a woman, Ms. Anatropia Theonest from CHADEMA. Susan Lyimo from CHADEMA also lost over to Abdallah Mtulia then from CUF (Mtulia has now defected and continues to be Kinondoni MP through CCM).

xxv Rumour has it that Asia Msangi and Amina Sagiti were selected to compete in the Ukonga’s and Korogwe’s constituencies, respectively, in 2018 by-elections because CHADEMA knew pretty well that they will fail. Minimum moral and financial support was extended to these candidates. Source: Interview with undisclosed informer.

xxvi PEOPLE IN THE NEWS: Anna Senkoro’s indelible mark, accessed from  https://www.thecitizen.co.tz/News/PEOPLE-IN-THE-NEWS---Anna-Senkoro-s-indelible-mark/1840340-3509770gqvih0/index.html on 7th April 2019.

xxvii Anna Mghwira ACT-presidential candidate for 2015 general elections, confirms to have been compelled to use her own funds to fund her campaign and little financial support could come from the party.

 xxviii Section 8C of PPA Amendment requires political parties to maintain register of their members, leaders of all administrative levels, and members of each of the party organ.  

xxix The included headings are (a) name of political party, abbreviation (if any), symbol (logo) and description of the party flag; (b) objective and ideology of the political party; (c) qualification and disqualification for membership of the party; (d) admission and cessation of members: (e) rights and duties of members; (0 disciplinary measures against members and leaders: intra-party resolution mechanism: (h) organization and structure of the party; (i) mandate to make and amend party constitution; t) mandate to make and amend party rules; (k) powers and functions of each party organ and leader (l) delegations of powers of each party organ and leader; (m) procedures for election of party leaders; (n) mandate and procedure of filling vacant posts; (o) frequency and quorum for meetings. {p) structure flor management of the party property; (q) number, nomination procedure and cessation of members.

 xxx Section 3 (5) (c&d) of PPA Amendment.

xxxi Section 4 (5) (A) (1) of PPA Amendment.

xxxii Section 3 (5) (f) and (i) of PPA Amendment.

xxxiii Section 8E(i) of PPA Amendment.

Karibu kwenye ulingo wa kutafakari kuhusu tunapotoka,tulipo,tuendako na namna ambavyo tutafika huko tuendako/Welcome to a platform for reflecting on where we are coming from, where we are, where we are going and how we will get there

  © Blogger templates 'Neuronic' by Ourblogtemplates.com 2008

Back to TOP