THE HIGHEST FORM OF LAW THE UN-MAKING TANZANIA CONSTITUTION BY ARSEIN MOLLAND ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Constitution being basic principal and valued/supreme one with public nature here in Tanzania has become the property of minority Politicians and some lawyer Court tool, The up-shot set into motion in the back day of 5th August, 2014 to wind the Ninety days added. THE OUT CRY INFLUENCED MAKING OF NEW CONSTITUTION In 1977 the young Republic of Tanzania small agricultural nation of fewer than Eighteen Millions Tanzanians, scattered for some kilometers along the eastern part of Africa Continent people who joined in 1964 in struggle to stay alive in the former generally hostile world, today as per the our last census has almost or more than Fifty Millions Tanzanians, being the most poor state around the most powerful/Giant states on earth old model industrialized, poor technology, low per capital income, In-puts exceeds Out-puts(Converted into dumped market for each and everything), lower life expectance, number of dependencies is greater than workers these are some of the problems facing this our state the question to me is whether this constitution making would astound change and growth? The said our Constitution has remained the same for the cup of years even before 1977 many of its words are the same and much of their meaning remain the same as well, this is why we need to have timely and fit constitution, not enough the said document of the aland has faced with several amendments willingly and in forceful ways refer the cases of the determined man REV. CHRISTOPHER MTIKILA V. THE ATTORNEY GENERAL, High Court (Lukakingira J.): September 22, 1994, Civil Case No. 5 of 1993, REV. CHRISTOPHER MTIKILA V. THE ATTORNEY GENERAL, High Court AT Darussalam Misc. CIVIL CAUSE NO. 10 OF 2005 also in MWALIMU PAUL JOHN MHOZYA v ATTORNEY GENERAL (No. 1) 1996 TLR 130 (HC) The issue at stake was “Separation of power” though need not be amplified here see also the case of (now my neighbor) PETER NG’OMANGO V. GERSON M.K. MWANGWA AND A.G (1993) HC NO 77 Before Mwalusanya J.(On his happy memory), The issue at stake was “Order of Ministerial Fiat” formerly Constitutional right to sue was enshrined with the number of encumbrances, In BUNZARI MPIGUZI v LUMWECHA MASHILI 1983 TLR 354 (HC) Fourth constitutional amendment 1984, In DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS v DAUDI PETE 1993 TLR 22 (CA)the issue of bail is not specifically portrayed in our presently documenting hence layman in this noble professional of Law are obscured also in ATTORNEY-GENERAL AND TWO OTHERS v AMAN WALID KABOUROU 1996 TLR 156 (CA) election issues/disputes are not stable (some cases takes more or about five years after election hence automatically deny the right of one side “delay of justice is the deny of right in this natured matters), REV. CHRISTOPHER MTIKILA v ATTORNEY GENERAL 1995 TLR 31 (HC) Lugakingira J.(as he then was) Supremacy of Parliament - Power of Parliament to amend the Constitution - Whether limitless Constitutional Law, REPUBLIC v MBUSHUU alias DOMINIC MNYAROJE AND KALAI SANGULA 1994 TLR 146 (HC) death penalty whether infringe right to life, ATTORNEY GENERAL v LOHAY AKONAAY AND JOSEPH LOHAY 1995 TLR 80 (CA) whether land is among properties stated under article 24 of Act No. 2 of 1977, these few shows how this our constitution does not suit the situation and there is great need to avoid numerous amendments (VIRAKA). Although the court upheld the basic structure doctrine by only the narrowest of margins, it has since gained widespread acceptance and legitimacy due to subsequent cases and judgments as an attempt suppress laxity. The Un-believable document of the land which Lacks emphasis on PRICE THEORY as to the three fundamental economic problems that is Scarcity, Choice and Opportunity cost is revealed by this tendency of increasing tax into factors and tools of production including Fuel with poor argument that the person who deals with fuel business are rich person but what is the repacation to reasonable man on a prudent standard? That is not enough no specification as to our NATIONAL INCOME on Macro and Micro Economics of our state is ambiguous as to circular flow, injection and withdraws in open, income expenditure, closed economics and output approaches in measuring our national income faced with the problems of subsistence output, per capital national income and welfare use of national income statistics, distribution of income and wealth, the DEVELOPMENT PROCESS AND THE CHOICE OF DEVELOPMENT STRATEGY is not specifically known to Tanzanians the enabling laws are weak the fact being the superior law leaves number of lacunae/laxity see the issue of Agricultural and Industry or Population and Labour and/or this un-specified inflation in whatever -thing/commodity you see. The other delibe issue is the drawing of right of one individual and that of another respectively as to separation of the Three organs of the state (Executive, Judicial and parliament), fun enough it is whereby the principal of natural justice prejudiced/ manipulated CONSTITUTION MAKING PROCESS. Constitution-making is a ubiquitous but poorly understood phenomenon. There is much speculation but relatively little evidence about the impact of different design processes on constitutional outcomes. Much of the debate reduces to the question of who is involved in the process and when. We consider two central issues in this regard. The first is the problem of institutional self-dealing, or whether governmental organs that have something to gain from the constitutional outcome should be involved in the process. The second has to do with the merits of public involvement in the process. Both of these concerns have clear normative implications and both are amenable to straightforward social scientific analysis. This article surveys the relevant research on constitution-making CONFLICTING INTERESTS IN PARLIAMENT Although the constitutional Parliament has wide powers, it did not have the power to destroy or emasculate the basic elements or fundamental features of the constitution or rules made. The underlying apprehension of the majority Tanzanians to the elected representatives could not be trusted to act responsibly as is perceived to be unprecedented but only conflicting of their own interests. TO BE CONTINUED ………………………………………………………………….. BY. ARSEIN M. TABUYA,
Posted on: Fri, 08 Aug 2014 04:38:23 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015