Topic: Online Puppets: Kumbe Tunao "Puppets" Wengi Kuliko Tunavyojidhania!

Wanabodi,

Ukoloni mbaya kabisa kuliko hata ukoloni wenyewe, ni ukoloni wa fikra!. Ukoloni huu, ni ule wa kufikiri na kuamini kila kisemachwo na Wamarekani ndicho sahihi!. Watanzania wenzetu ambao mnajidhania kuwa ni wazalendo wa kweli wa nchi hii, lakini mnawaaminia sana Wamarekani kila wasemacho wao ndio right, mnijue bado mnaishi kwenye ukoloni wa ki fikra na you are not better than "American Puppets"!.

Nimeyasema haya kufuatia baadhi ya wenzetu kuwaaminia sana Wamarekani na kuwa kila kinachosemwa na Wamarekani kwao ndio uthibitisho wa ukweli wao!. Hali hii ya kuwaaminia Wamarekani kuliko hata vyombo vyetu wenyewe, iliwahi kujitokeza huko nyuma, pale Wamarekani walipodai, Rais Jakaya Kikwete, alihongwa suti na tajiri fulani, na uwongo mwingine mwingi, ikiwemo kuhongwa pesa za kampeni na kuitumia hoteli fulani jijini kwa mapumziko mafupi "short time"!.

Japo Ikulu, iliukanusha vikali uwongo huo, lakini kuna wenzetu wengi tuu ambao wanajiaminisha wao ni wazalendo zaidi wa taifa hili, bado wanaamini ukweli ni ule waliosema Wamarekani na uwongo ni lile kanusho la Ikulu!. Hawa ni puppets!. Hivi sasa kuna mjadala mkubwa kuhusu Wanzanzibari kujitoa katika muungano, ndani ya mjadala huo, mimi nimesema mahali, "Muungano kati ya Tanganyika na Zanzibar, uliridhiwa (ratified), na upande mmoja tuu wa muungano, upande wa Tanganyika, lakini kwa Zanzibar, haukuwa ridhiwa!".

Tena nikasema kuridhia (ratification), ni process na hufanywa kwa maandishi (in writings) na sio kwa kauli!. Nikasisitiza, msingi wa muungano ni kauli za Nyerere na Karume, lakini kauli hizo, haziwezi kusimama bila maandishi!, ndipo zikaandaliwa "Articles of Union" aizombalo ndilo andishi au msahafu wa muungano!. Baada ya Articles hizo za muungano kusainiwa, sheria za "international treaties", zisisitiza, lazima ziwe "ratified" kwenye nchi husika ili zipate uhalali wa kisheria (legitimacy). Articles zile kwa Tanganyika, zilipitia "ratification process yote ili kuziridhia, na ziliridhiwa kwa maandishi na kutangazwa kwenye GN!. Kwa upande wa Zanzibar, hakuna kilichofanyika zaidi ya kauli ya Karume kuwa BLM limeridhia!. Ratification haifanyiki kwa kauli bali kwa maandishi!. Nikasisitiza, hakuna maandiko yoyote popote yanayothibitisha kuwa muungano ulikuwa ratified Zanzibar!.

Mwana jf mwenzetu leo amekuja na maandiko ya Wamarekani eti huo ndio uthibitisho muungano uliridhiwa Zanzibar!. Kama mtu anaambiwa "ratification ni nini" na hufanyika kwa maandishi na kuelezwa kuwa hakuna any ratification process iliyofanyika Zanzibar, lakini analazimisha kwa kuwaaminia Wamarekani, jee,huu ndio ule ukoloni wa kifkra aliousema mwalimu Nyerere?.

Jee wewe mwana jf mwenzangu, unawaaminia zaidi Wamarekani na kila wasemacho, au angalau unauminia ukweli halisi ambao ndio ukweli wa mambo!.

"Seek the Truth, and the Truth Set You Free"!.

"Emancipate Yourself From Mental Slavery"-Bob Marley!.

Angalizo: "Great Minds" don't discuss people!, hiyo ni kazi ya "Simple Mind" hii thread, hatu discuss watu, tuna discuss idea ya wenzetu humu kuwa puppets chini ya mental slavery ya kuwaaminia sana Wamarekani!, hivyo nawaombeni sana tusianze kutaja taja majina nani ni puppet na nani sio!. Jadili tuu kama unawaamini Wamarekani kuliko tunavyojiamini wenyewe!

Natanguliza shukrani.

Pasco.

Ratification of the union between Zanzibar and Tanganyika has long since been a major issue of debate between people from both sides of the union..especially the Zanzibaris....because most of them think that there was no ratification of the articles of union from their side.

My conclusive take on the matter:

• The principal instrument which forms the legal base for the union is the Articles of Union between the two independent states (i.e Tanganyika and Zanzibar).
• This legal instrument signed by two sovereign states is a treaty under the International law(under the Vienna convention, of which Tanzania is a signatory).
• Article 11 of the Vienna convention provides that:“The consent of a state to be bound by the treaty may be expressed by signature, exchange of instruments constituting a treaty, ratification, acceptance, approval or accession, or by any other means if so agreed.
• There is confirmation (legal) on ratification of the Articles of the union on the side of Tanganyika.
• There are no legal records to confirm ratification of union in Zanzibar.
• Finally, generally, the Articles of Union are presumed to have been ratified on a corresponding statute called the Union of Zanzibar and Tanganyika Law.

My conclusion is just based on reading an academic discussion by Ali.U.Mussa....in his thesis which involved significant discussions/quotes from academicians, politicians and lawyers....both discussing advantages/disadvantages of the union...I hereby put down some of the discussions on the union ratification matter for you to conclude too...

THE ARTICLES OF UNION
The principal instrument which forms the legal base for the union is the Articles of Union between these two independent states. This legal instrument signed by two sovereign states is a treaty under the International law.¹ The Vienna convention (of which Tanzania is a signatory) on law of treaties defines a treaty as an international agreement concluded by two or more states reduced into a written form. Such agreement may be embodied in one or more instruments.² Based on this definition; the Articles of union would fall within this definition. It is important that for a valid treaty must exhibit the consent of the parties to it.

Article 11 of the Vienna convention provides:
“The consent of a state to be bound by the treaty may be expressed by signature, exchange of instruments constituting a treaty, ratification, acceptance, approval or accession, or by any other means if so agreed.”³

These Articles form the constitution of the Union or what is commonly known as the Grund Norm. This Grund Norm is the supreme law of the United Republic and no other law, even the Constitutions of the United Republic of Tanzania or that of Zanzibar can be above it. It is on these grounds that one ventures to say that the Articles of Union are supreme, and no other body, even the Parliament can go outside its limits. In this respect, the Articles may be amended only through a consensus of the two contracting sovereign parties, and no other body may do so, not even the Parliament of United Republic.

It is true that the Articles were agreed and signed on 22 April 1964 by Presidents Nyerere of Tanganyika and Karume of Zanzibar on behalf of their respective countries. The Article provides that the Republic of Tanganyika and the People’s Republic of Zanzibar shall be united in one sovereign Republic (Tanzania).⁴

It was also agreed that during the interim period, that is the period from the commencement of the union until the union constituent assembly adopts a Union Constitution, (Artil ll) the union shall be governed by the Constitution of Tanganyika (art lll) as the interim Constitution. The interim Constitution, which was to be modified to provide a separate executive and legislative in and for Zanzibar. The executive and legislative programs were to be constituted in accordance with the existing laws of Zanzibar (Art lll(a) ) .The legislature and executive for Zanzibar were vested with exclusive jurisdiction for all non-union matters.

Further, the interim constitution had also to provide for the representation of Zanzibar in the Union parliament (art iii (c) ) and establishment of the office of two vice- presidents, one of whom would be the Principal Assistance of the President in Tanganyika and the other would be the head of executive in and for Zanzibar and the Principal Assistant of the President of the United Republic in discharge of his executive function in relation to Zanzibar . (Art lll(b) )
The Articles were flexible to allow modification for other matters desirable to give effect to the United Republic or the treaty. (Art lll (d) ).

RATIFICATION OF ARTICLES OF UNION

Under the common law, state’s treaty obligation, the state parties are not bound by it unless it is incorporated into municipal law by an Act of Parliament. The Articles of Union specifically required ratification before they became binding on the parties.
The Articles of the union provided for a ratification procedure before they became valid and operational.

Article VIII of the Articles of Union provides:
“These Articles shall be subject to the enactment of laws by the Parliament of Tanganyika and by the Revolutionary Council of the Peoples Republic of Zanzibar in conjunction with the cabinet of ministers thereof, ratifying the same and providing for the Government of United Republic and of Zanzibar in accordance therewith.”

The above provision implies that there should have been an enactment by the Parliament of Tanganyika to ratify the Articles and on the same spirit the Revolutionary Government should also have enacted a Decree to ratify the Articles. The requirement of this provision was not adhered to the Revolutionary Government of Zanzibar.

However, it is argued by Prof. Shivji that the Articles of Union could be presumed to have been ratified since a corresponding law was passed by the Revolutionary Council of Zanzibar and translated into Municipal law. Hon. Abubakar, the leader of opposition in The House of Representatives of Zanzibar and the former Attorney General of Zanzibar, disagreed with Prof. Shivji on the on ground that the law was not passed by the Revolutionary Council which was at that time a legislature cum a cabinet.

In respect to non-existence of the law passed by the Revolutionary Council, Hon. Abubakar had this to say:

“I myself have been the Zanzibar Attorney General and Minster responsible for justice between 1984 and 1989. At that time I managed to peruse all the statute books of Zanzibar from 1964 and 1979 when the Revolutionary Council was acting as a legislative Assembly cum the Cabinet. No ratification law or any law to that effect is there. I was not myopic, but even if I was, the first Attorney General of Zanzibar after the Revolution had also testified the same that no law ratifying the Articles of union exists on the Statute Books of Zanzibar.”⁵

Apart from the above assertion, Hon Abubakar is of the view that, due to the doctrine of acquiescence, and that nobody has challenged the validity of the Articles of Union, and further that both governments have been discharging their functions as stipulated under their respective Constitutions, peoples of Tanganyika and Zanzibar are satisfied and have agreed the arrangement without protest. To this effect, we are of the view that Hon Abubakar is not disagreeing with Prof. Shivji on the legality of the Union.

Ali Saleh is of the opinion that:
“…as to make union legal, there must be ratification on it, a thing which never happened on the side of Zanzibar…”⁶

While there was confirmation on ratification of the Article of the union on the side of Tanganyika as the Tanganyika Parliament passed the union of Tanganyika and Zanzibar Act, 1964 situation in Zanzibar was in doubtful, because there was no record to substantiate its ratification in Zanzibar statutes.

The then Zanzibar Attorney General Mr. Wolfgang Dourado publicly claimed that:
“No law ratifying the Articles of the union of 1964 exists on the statute books of Zanzibar.”

He further added:
“………….. The Principal Legal adviser to the Zanzibar government was not consulted ……… Zanzibar therefore did not have legal or constitutional advice from its Principal Legal adviser.” ⁷

However, it is of common knowledge that Tanganyika had such legal advice from British expatriates, Attorney general, Mr. Ronald Brown and Chief Parliamentary Draftsman Mr. P.R.N Fifoot. On the part of Zanzibar, President Karume was advised by Professor Dan Wadada, a Ugandan lawyer and not by the Zanzibar Attorney General Mr. Justice Dourado.
Dourado’s claim was supported by Professor Shivji who conducted a research for any legal notice or statute and perused all copies of the Zanzibar Government Gazette, including the supplement of the two calendar years, 1964 and 1965 in order to unearth any evidence of ratification.

He said: “There is no notice whatsoever as regards the enactment of a law ratifying the Articles of Union.”⁸

The formation of the Union of Tanzania and its ratification was a secret to many Tanzanians even those at the realm of the leadership. But Bagenda has different opinion on the ratification by Tanganyika Parliament. He says:
“…it is true that Zanzibar never ratified the Articles, but even Tanganyika Parliament was just a TANU’s rubber stamp…….”₉

Mr Aboud Jumbe Mwinyi, the former President of Zanzibar and Vice-President of Tanzania, who at the time of the union was the Minister of State of Zanzibar, came to know of the Union four days before the official signing of the Treaty.
He said:
“It was morning of April 22, 1964, when Julius K. Nyerere arrived in Zanzibar. This President of Tanganyika came with copy of the treaty proposals prepared in Tanganyika ……. I was not at the State House Zanzibar at the signing…I was in Pemba (that morning) on official duty, and when I came back, for the first time I was informed and had known about that Union. President Karume, what he told me was, Tanganyika and Zanzibar were united that morning and President Nyerere shall be the President of the Union Government and he shall be the Vice-President and the Union shall be confirmed in Dar-es-Salaam on the April 26 , 1964.” ¹⁰

This proved that neither the people were informed no consulted on this major policy issue, which involved their lives and the future of their country. Further, it is submitted that the Union was between President Nyerere and President Karume to achieve their political ends.
The question remains unanswered as to whether the treaty was ratified or not, and if it was, how was it ratified?

FURTHER ARGUMENTS ABOUT PROOF OF RATIFICATION

Other academics have advanced further argument to prove the ratification of the Articles of the Union. Should Zanzibar have argued that such legislation does not exist on its statute books .The Tanganyika Hansard of 1964, which recorded that the Speaker welcomed president Nyerere and President Karume at 5.08 a.m. on April 27, 1964 when the ceremony of exchanging the instrument of ratification took place in Karimjee Building, the seat of the National Assembly is proof of ratification.

Another argument advanced is that of ratification of the Article by acquiescence.
The normal procedure for enactment of the laws which includes the ratification of the Articles of the union, 1964 was not followed, and that is why the only evidence of ratification is the legal Notice appearing in the Tanganyika Gazette.

Professor Haroub Othman, on the other hand, argues on a very flimsy preposition that he was told by Abdulrahman Babu and one Khamis Ameir ( babu and khamis were among the members of the first rev council 1964- 1972) that they (revolutionary Council members ) discussed the union in the cabinet and agreed upon the ratification . Prof Haroub further substantiates his argument in that one Ali Juma Shamhuna (Minister of state in chief Minister Office) , an immature young boy at that time also told him of the same while they were at the YASU club . Professor Haroub maintained the argument at a seminar held at Bwawani Hotel on 6 ^th –7 ^th April 2002 and further instated that for these reasons the Articles of Union have been ratified.

On this particular point, Abubakary Khamis Bakary (opposing) says that:

“I do not agree with him in Total. We cannot in law substantiate our arguments with hearsay or with what the Revolutionary Council Members had said during their deliberation. As Lord Denning had said (l. Denning – in the Discipline of law pg 10) that one cannot look at what the responsible Minister has said in the Parliament or what Hansard has reported. But we have to and must look at what legislation (Act) is talking about. There has to be a law enacted by the Parliament of Tanganyika separately and by the Revolutionary Council separately to ratify the Articles as required under Article viii of the Articles of the Union.” ¹¹

Ismael Jussa asserted that:

“The ratification instrument purported to have been passed by the Zanzibar Revolutionary Council was only the certified by the then Acting Solicitor General of Tanganyika P.R.N Fit foot that the law for the ratification of the Article of the union was passed by the Revolutionary Council”¹²

He added that:
One must be refreshed here that all “laws” passed by the Revolutionary Council between 1964 and 1979 ere called “Decrees) and not laws. It is evident that this “law” had been formulated in Tanganyika Official Gazette for the purpose of silencing those who would attempt to show that no ratification was made by the Zanzibar Revolutionary Council, and no more.
There is notion that Karume and Nyerere agreed on the general format of the union and left a lawyer to draft the precise agreement.
However, it is submitted that, in law the article can be presumed to have been ratified and that they are valid articles of treaty within the meaning of Vienna Convention on the law of treaties.

This concludes that the Articles of Union presumed to have been ratified on a corresponding statute called the Union of Zanzibar and Tanganyika Law (herein after referred to as the union law) which was made by the Revolutionary Council in accordance with the provisions of the Articles .The union law is in pari material to the Union Act except for the preamble and section 7 and 8(1). These are known as Acts of the Union of Tanganyika and Zanzibar.

References:
1. Miskry Ibid pg 29
2. Vienna Convention Treaty.
3. Ibid
4. Article I of the Article of Union
5. The Union: in the union of and Zanzibar Constitutions
6. Ali Saleh Ibid
7. The consolidation of Zanzibar Union – A basic Re-Appraisal pg 3-4
8. I.G Shijvi – ibid pg
9. Bagenda Ibid
10. Jumbe Ibid
11. Abubakary Ibid.
12. Ismael Jussa Ibid

By Pasco

Tena nikasema kuridhia (ratification), ni process na hufanywa kwa maandishi (in writings) na sio kwa kauli!. Nikasisitiza, msingi wa muungano ni kauli za Nyerere na Karume, lakini kauli hizo, haziwezi kusimama bila maandishi!, ndipo zikaandaliwa "Articles of Union" aizombalo ndilo andishi au msahafu wa muungano!. Baada ya Articles hizo za muungano kusainiwa, sheria za "international treaties", zisisitiza, lazima ziwe "ratified" kwenye nchi husika ili zipate uhalali wa kisheria (legitimacy). Articles zile kwa Tanganyika, zilipitia "ratification process yote ili kuziridhia, na ziliridhiwa kwa maandishi na kutangazwa kwenye GN!. Kwa upande wa Zanzibar, hakuna kilichofanyika zaidi ya kauli ya Karume kuwa BLM limeridhia!. Ratification haifanyiki kwa kauli bali kwa maandishi!. Nikasisitiza, hakuna maandiko yoyote popote yanayothibitisha kuwa muungano ulikuwa ratified Zanzibar!.

Pasco,

..kwanini baraza la mapinduzi lilijadili muungano na kukubali kwa "mdomo" tu bila kuweka jambo hili ktk maandishi/ratification?

..zaidi, kwanini Baraza la wawakilishi baada ya kuundwa halikufanya marekebisho kwa ku-ratify huo mkataba wa muungano na badala yake wakaendelea na masuala mengine kama kuunganisha vyama etc etc kana kwamba everything was OK??

..mwisho, what needs to be done? what is the way forward??

No matter if the Union is legal or Illegal between Tanganyika and Zanzibar, it is a lso legal to dismantle the Union if most of the citizens in both countries or one of them are not happy with the union.

In our situation, we simply need a referendum to determine if the so called is needed by the majority of the citizens in their countries. it is easier to start the referendum in Zanzibar due to its size and population, if it is so determined that the majority of Zanzibaris are against the Union we wouldn't need the referendum on the mainland. It will be a closed a case and dismantling of the union should therefore take place.

Why quarrel over a simple matter?

Mimi bado nasubiri somo la leo la ratification...

By ZeMarcopolo

Mimi bado nasubiri somo la leo la ratification...

Ngoja niseme katika mengi ambayo tunatarajia kuyasikia mtego ambao Pasco atajifunga nao uko hapa (msisitizo wangu):

Tena nikasema kuridhia (ratification), ni process na hufanywa kwa maandishi (in writings) na sio kwa kauli!.

By Mzee Mwanakijiji

Ooh boy!!!







Ooh boy!

.


ooh boy!!



hiki ulichosema hakina msingi wa ukweli; hadi hivi sasa hujasema nani alitakiwa kuridhia? ushahidi wa historia (siyo walivyosema Wamarekani, hata nyaraka zetu zinaonesha hivyo) Muungano uliridhiwa Zanzibar na chombo halali. Hakukuwa na chombo kingine cha juu yake kuridhia?





Huu tena ni upotashaji wa historia; msingi wa Muungano siyo "kauli" za Karume na Nyerere. Mazungumzo ya suala la kuunganisha Tanganyika na Zanzibar yalianza kabla ya Karume kuwa Rais na ukifuatilia historia utaona yalianza kwa mahusiano ya ASP na TANU miaka 1950s. Msingi wa Muungano siyo "kauli" ni mahusiano ya karibu kati ya Bara na Zanzibar; mahusiano ambayo yalifanya mazungumzo ya baadaye ya Muungano (siyo kauli za juu juu tu) kuweza yafanyike.

Unaposema 'ni kauli' unaamini porojo za mitaani kwamba Karume alizungumza na Nyerere TU bila kuhusisha watu wengine halafu hao wawili wakaamua kuunganisha nchi zetu. Bunge la Tanganyika lilijadili na Baraza la Mapinduzi likajadili na vyombo vyote viwili vikaridhia (ratified) kuunagnisha Muungano.



Umekuwa ukirudia hili la 'sheria za Kimataifa' naomba ututajie ni sheria gani ya kimataifa ambayo inaweza kutumika (kua applied) kwenye suala la Muungano wa Tanganyika na Zanzibar ili angalau tujue unazungumzia nini isije kuwa ni'sheria za kimataifa' ambazo ziko hewani tu. Ni sheria ipi hasa ya kimataifa inayosisitiza kuwa makubaliano ya Muunagno yapaswa kuwa ratified?


Labda huelewi kabisa au hutaki kuelewa maana ya BLM; Baraza La Mapinduzi linaongozwa kimapinduzi siyo kidemokrasia. Kwamba baraza la Mapinduzi limeridhia ni rahisi kwenu waandishi kumuuliza Shein - ambaye ni Mwenyekiti wa BLM - kusema kama BLM haikuridhia. Hadi hivi sasa hakuna mtu hata mmoja ambaye ameweza kuonesha kuwa BLM halikuridhia na ukweli wa uwepo wa Muungano na BLM una presume kuridhiwa huko.




Ukoloni wa kifikra ni kuamini kuwa serikali yako ikisema basi hutakiwi kuhoji; unatakiwa kukubali tu kwa vile kwa kufanya hivyo unaonesha uzalendo. Lakini ni utumwa mbaya wa kifikra kwamba kwa vile Wamarekani wamesema basi haipaswi kuaminiwa! Bahati nzuri, suala la Muungano wa Tanganyika na Zanzibar ni suala ambalo limeandikwa sana na kuchunguzwa na watu wengi kweli - nje ya Wamarekani. Ukichukua muda kusoma badala ya kurusha maneno ya kihisia (emotional arguments) unaweza kuona kuwa hakuna utata kwamba baraza la mapinduzi liliitwa na kuambiwa kuhusu mazungumzo ya Muungano na walitoa ridhaa yake.


Hapa umeshindwa hata kuulinganisha. Ulitakiwa uulize kama watu wanaamini "Wamarekani na kila wasemacho" au wanaamini "serikali yetu na kila isemacho". Ukweli hautegemei nani ameusema. Wewe unapresume kuwa kwa vile wamesema Wamarekani basi ni uongo wakati ukisikia serikali imesema unajisikia unaamini kuwa ni kweli. Ukweli haupatikani hivyo; ukweli unaenda juu ya kujisikia.



Hapana haisemwi hivyo inasemwa "And you shall know the truth, and the truth shall set you free" John 8:32 yaani "nanyi mtaifahamu kweli nayo kweli itawaweka huru". Jitahidi kuufahamu ukweli siyo tu kuendelea kuutafuta!




Bahati mbaya sana umeanza na maneno ya kujadili watu badala yahoja zao; umeshindwa kujenga hoja zaidi ya kulaumu wengine kuwa ni 'puppets' wa Kimarekani kwa sababu hawafikiri kama unavyofikiri wewe; hiv8i wewe ukiitwa ni puppet wa watawala walioshindwa utakataa? au Kikaragosi wa mafisadi? Mtu akuite hivyo kwa sababu ameshindwa kukuelewa misimamo yako au anapingana na wewe? Kwanini isiwe tu kwamba tunatofautiana kimtazamo bila kumfikiria mwingine analipwa na nani, anajipendekeza wapi na kwanini au anatafuta ujiko upi?

Ukitaka kujadili hoja jadili hoja, ukianza kuita watu majina maana yake ni kuwa hoja zako tayari zimeshindwa na sasa unaleta vioja! Jibu hoja kwa hoja siyo vioja!

excellent mzee mwanakijiji

By Pasco

Mkuu FJM, nipo na makatasi yote ninayo, naendelea tuu kuwasikiliza watoa hoja, kama nilivyoanza, nitamaliza tena kwa msisitizo mkubwa " MUUNGANO KATI YA TANGANYIKA NA ZANZIBAR HAUKUWAHI KURIDHIWA ZANZIBAR"!.

HAKUNA ANDIKO LOLOTE, MUHTAASARI WOWOTE UNAOONYESHA ILIWAHI KUWEPO AGENDA YOYOTE WALA MINITI YOYOTE POPOTE KUTHIBITISHA MUUNGANO ULIRIDHIWA ZANZIBAR"!.

Hiyo doc ya CIA ni kuonyesha tuu kuwa Karume alimwambia Babu kuwa BLM limeridhia kwa kauli moja!. Hilo BLM liliridhia kwa kauli moja nini ambayo hakujawahi kupelekwa agenda hiyo kwenye kikao chochote na hakuna uthibitisho wowote kuwa suala hilo liliridhiwa!.

Kwa vile saa hizi ni usiku mkubwa, nalala na kesho nafunga rasmi kazi!.

Pasco.

Unazungumzia andiko gani ikiwa Zanzibar tunayoizungumzia ilitokana na Mapinduzi na sii ile ya Sultan wala bunge liloundwa kutokana na Uhuru wa mwaka 1963?. Pengine sijui kama unaweza nambia serikali gani iliyokuwepo Zanibar wakati muungano unafanyika na kina nani walikuwepo ktk kuunda muungano maana nijuavyoi mimi Karume, Abraham Babu, Hanga na baadhi ya wajumbe wengine walikuwepo ambao ndio uongozi (executive board) wa Mapinduzi tena kwa baraka za BLM sasa sielewi hiyo ratification unayozungumzia ilifanyika Bara sio Zanzibar ni ipi..

Unajua swali lako ni sawa na kusema Nyerere alichanganya mchanga upande mmoja tu hakufanya upande mwingine, Artical of Union ilisainiwa upande mmoja tu haikufanyika upande mwingine na menngineyo. Halafu sijui kama wewe wa Bara uliulizwa kuhusu Muungano huo? Ulipiga kura ya maoni kuhusiana na muungano maana hapa kila siku lawama Bara hivi bara vile mbona nasi tuliiingizwa mkenge kama hao Zanzibar.

Tatizo lenu mnashindwa kutazama circumstances led to Union. Hamfahamu kwa undani hali halisi ya upinzani ilokuwepo Zanzibar sii tu kwa ZAP bali hata ndani ya ASP kina Hanga, Nassoro Moyo na wengine walokuwa upande wa kushoto. Na pengine hujui ya kwamba vikao vya muungano vilikuwepo hata kabla ya Mapinduzi Maana unasahau kwamba chama cha African Association kilianzishwa Zanzibar, kisha likafunguliwa tawi Dar na hivyo AA ya bara ikaja kuwa TAA halafu TANU na ile ya Zanzibar wakaungana na Washiraz kuundwa ASP ushirikiano haukuanza baada ya Mapinduzi hata kidogo.

Mahusiano ya Bara na visiwani kisiasa yalikuwepo kabla kabisa ya Uhuru na huo Muungano ulikuwa moja ya vitu vya awali kabisa vilviyozungumziwa ndani ya vikao vya TANU na ASP hivyo usitake sana kuwasikia watu wa ZAP ambao kifupi ndio waliopinduliwa..na malengo haya yalitokana na mikutano mingi ya Pan Africanism ilokuwa ikifanyika kabla na baada ya Uhuru.

Hivyo kuungana kwa Tanganyika na Zanzibar ni zao la mwongozo ulokuwepo ktk kuunda Afrika moja sema tu tofauti zetu ktk umaskini, uroho wa madaraka ndio umekuwa kikwazo kikubwa kwa viongozi wa Kiafrika kufikia malengo hayo..In 60s ukizungumzia Afrika kujitenga wewe utaonekana mchawi tena hutapendwa kabisa..Sema leo tupo ktk dunia nyingine kabisa na tumefikia ku question Muungano lakini ajabu mbona hatu question UHuru wetu kwani tuliulizwa? au ulisainiwa Mwanza au Ukerewe na mkerewe gani alihusishwa!..

Haya maswali yenu jamani wakati mwingine rudini nyuma na kuitazama Tanganyika na Zanzibar ya mwaka 1964 sio hii na mjue tofauti ya ratification za Muungano, Jumuiya na treaties nyinginezo baada ya kuwa na serikali. Labda nikuulize, hivi Zanzibar waliandika lini katiba yao ya kwanza baada ya Mapinduzi au ni wakati gani waliunda serikali na vyombo vyake baada ya Mapinduzi na kabla ya Muungano..halafu hatua kwa hatua tutafahamu ni wapi hiyo ratification iliruka.

By nderingosha

Ratification of the union between Zanzibar and Tanganyika has long since been a major issue of debate between people from both sides of the union..especially the Zanzibaris....because most of them think that there was no ratification of the articles of union from their side.

My conclusive take on the matter:

• The principal instrument which forms the legal base for the union is the Articles of Union between the two independent states (i.e Tanganyika and Zanzibar).
• This legal instrument signed by two sovereign states is a treaty under the International law(under the Vienna convention, of which Tanzania is a signatory).
• Article 11 of the Vienna convention provides that:“The consent of a state to be bound by the treaty may be expressed by signature, exchange of instruments constituting a treaty, ratification, acceptance, approval or accession, or by any other means if so agreed.
• There is confirmation (legal) on ratification of the Articles of the union on the side of Tanganyika.
• There are no legal records to confirm ratification of union in Zanzibar.
• Finally, generally, the Articles of Union are presumed to have been ratified on a corresponding statute called the Union of Zanzibar and Tanganyika Law.

My conclusion is just based on reading an academic discussion by Ali.U.Mussa....in his thesis which involved significant discussions/quotes from academicians, politicians and lawyers....both discussing advantages/disadvantages of the union...I hereby put down some of the discussions on the union ratification matter for you to conclude too...

THE ARTICLES OF UNION
The principal instrument which forms the legal base for the union is the Articles of Union between these two independent states. This legal instrument signed by two sovereign states is a treaty under the International law.¹ The Vienna convention (of which Tanzania is a signatory) on law of treaties defines a treaty as an international agreement concluded by two or more states reduced into a written form. Such agreement may be embodied in one or more instruments.² Based on this definition; the Articles of union would fall within this definition. It is important that for a valid treaty must exhibit the consent of the parties to it.

Article 11 of the Vienna convention provides:
“The consent of a state to be bound by the treaty may be expressed by signature, exchange of instruments constituting a treaty, ratification, acceptance, approval or accession, or by any other means if so agreed.”³

These Articles form the constitution of the Union or what is commonly known as the Grund Norm. This Grund Norm is the supreme law of the United Republic and no other law, even the Constitutions of the United Republic of Tanzania or that of Zanzibar can be above it. It is on these grounds that one ventures to say that the Articles of Union are supreme, and no other body, even the Parliament can go outside its limits. In this respect, the Articles may be amended only through a consensus of the two contracting sovereign parties, and no other body may do so, not even the Parliament of United Republic.

It is true that the Articles were agreed and signed on 22 April 1964 by Presidents Nyerere of Tanganyika and Karume of Zanzibar on behalf of their respective countries. The Article provides that the Republic of Tanganyika and the People’s Republic of Zanzibar shall be united in one sovereign Republic (Tanzania).⁴

It was also agreed that during the interim period, that is the period from the commencement of the union until the union constituent assembly adopts a Union Constitution, (Artil ll) the union shall be governed by the Constitution of Tanganyika (art lll) as the interim Constitution. The interim Constitution, which was to be modified to provide a separate executive and legislative in and for Zanzibar. The executive and legislative programs were to be constituted in accordance with the existing laws of Zanzibar (Art lll(a) ) .The legislature and executive for Zanzibar were vested with exclusive jurisdiction for all non-union matters.

Further, the interim constitution had also to provide for the representation of Zanzibar in the Union parliament (art iii (c) ) and establishment of the office of two vice- presidents, one of whom would be the Principal Assistance of the President in Tanganyika and the other would be the head of executive in and for Zanzibar and the Principal Assistant of the President of the United Republic in discharge of his executive function in relation to Zanzibar . (Art lll(b) )
The Articles were flexible to allow modification for other matters desirable to give effect to the United Republic or the treaty. (Art lll (d) ).

RATIFICATION OF ARTICLES OF UNION

Under the common law, state’s treaty obligation, the state parties are not bound by it unless it is incorporated into municipal law by an Act of Parliament. The Articles of Union specifically required ratification before they became binding on the parties.
The Articles of the union provided for a ratification procedure before they became valid and operational.

Article VIII of the Articles of Union provides:
“These Articles shall be subject to the enactment of laws by the Parliament of Tanganyika and by the Revolutionary Council of the Peoples Republic of Zanzibar in conjunction with the cabinet of ministers thereof, ratifying the same and providing for the Government of United Republic and of Zanzibar in accordance therewith.”

The above provision implies that there should have been an enactment by the Parliament of Tanganyika to ratify the Articles and on the same spirit the Revolutionary Government should also have enacted a Decree to ratify the Articles. The requirement of this provision was not adhered to the Revolutionary Government of Zanzibar.

However, it is argued by Prof. Shivji that the Articles of Union could be presumed to have been ratified since a corresponding law was passed by the Revolutionary Council of Zanzibar and translated into Municipal law. Hon. Abubakar, the leader of opposition in The House of Representatives of Zanzibar and the former Attorney General of Zanzibar, disagreed with Prof. Shivji on the on ground that the law was not passed by the Revolutionary Council which was at that time a legislature cum a cabinet.

In respect to non-existence of the law passed by the Revolutionary Council, Hon. Abubakar had this to say:

“I myself have been the Zanzibar Attorney General and Minster responsible for justice between 1984 and 1989. At that time I managed to peruse all the statute books of Zanzibar from 1964 and 1979 when the Revolutionary Council was acting as a legislative Assembly cum the Cabinet. No ratification law or any law to that effect is there. I was not myopic, but even if I was, the first Attorney General of Zanzibar after the Revolution had also testified the same that no law ratifying the Articles of union exists on the Statute Books of Zanzibar.”⁵

Apart from the above assertion, Hon Abubakar is of the view that, due to the doctrine of acquiescence, and that nobody has challenged the validity of the Articles of Union, and further that both governments have been discharging their functions as stipulated under their respective Constitutions, peoples of Tanganyika and Zanzibar are satisfied and have agreed the arrangement without protest. To this effect, we are of the view that Hon Abubakar is not disagreeing with Prof. Shivji on the legality of the Union.

Ali Saleh is of the opinion that:
“…as to make union legal, there must be ratification on it, a thing which never happened on the side of Zanzibar…”⁶

While there was confirmation on ratification of the Article of the union on the side of Tanganyika as the Tanganyika Parliament passed the union of Tanganyika and Zanzibar Act, 1964 situation in Zanzibar was in doubtful, because there was no record to substantiate its ratification in Zanzibar statutes.

The then Zanzibar Attorney General Mr. Wolfgang Dourado publicly claimed that:
“No law ratifying the Articles of the union of 1964 exists on the statute books of Zanzibar.”

He further added:
“………….. The Principal Legal adviser to the Zanzibar government was not consulted ……… Zanzibar therefore did not have legal or constitutional advice from its Principal Legal adviser.” ⁷

However, it is of common knowledge that Tanganyika had such legal advice from British expatriates, Attorney general, Mr. Ronald Brown and Chief Parliamentary Draftsman Mr. P.R.N Fifoot. On the part of Zanzibar, President Karume was advised by Professor Dan Wadada, a Ugandan lawyer and not by the Zanzibar Attorney General Mr. Justice Dourado.
Dourado’s claim was supported by Professor Shivji who conducted a research for any legal notice or statute and perused all copies of the Zanzibar Government Gazette, including the supplement of the two calendar years, 1964 and 1965 in order to unearth any evidence of ratification.

He said: “There is no notice whatsoever as regards the enactment of a law ratifying the Articles of Union.”⁸

The formation of the Union of Tanzania and its ratification was a secret to many Tanzanians even those at the realm of the leadership. But Bagenda has different opinion on the ratification by Tanganyika Parliament. He says:
“…it is true that Zanzibar never ratified the Articles, but even Tanganyika Parliament was just a TANU’s rubber stamp…….”₉

Mr Aboud Jumbe Mwinyi, the former President of Zanzibar and Vice-President of Tanzania, who at the time of the union was the Minister of State of Zanzibar, came to know of the Union four days before the official signing of the Treaty.
He said:
“It was morning of April 22, 1964, when Julius K. Nyerere arrived in Zanzibar. This President of Tanganyika came with copy of the treaty proposals prepared in Tanganyika ……. I was not at the State House Zanzibar at the signing…I was in Pemba (that morning) on official duty, and when I came back, for the first time I was informed and had known about that Union. President Karume, what he told me was, Tanganyika and Zanzibar were united that morning and President Nyerere shall be the President of the Union Government and he shall be the Vice-President and the Union shall be confirmed in Dar-es-Salaam on the April 26 , 1964.” ¹⁰

This proved that neither the people were informed no consulted on this major policy issue, which involved their lives and the future of their country. Further, it is submitted that the Union was between President Nyerere and President Karume to achieve their political ends.
The question remains unanswered as to whether the treaty was ratified or not, and if it was, how was it ratified?

FURTHER ARGUMENTS ABOUT PROOF OF RATIFICATION

Other academics have advanced further argument to prove the ratification of the Articles of the Union. Should Zanzibar have argued that such legislation does not exist on its statute books .The Tanganyika Hansard of 1964, which recorded that the Speaker welcomed president Nyerere and President Karume at 5.08 a.m. on April 27, 1964 when the ceremony of exchanging the instrument of ratification took place in Karimjee Building, the seat of the National Assembly is proof of ratification.

Another argument advanced is that of ratification of the Article by acquiescence.
The normal procedure for enactment of the laws which includes the ratification of the Articles of the union, 1964 was not followed, and that is why the only evidence of ratification is the legal Notice appearing in the Tanganyika Gazette.

Professor Haroub Othman, on the other hand, argues on a very flimsy preposition that he was told by Abdulrahman Babu and one Khamis Ameir ( babu and khamis were among the members of the first rev council 1964- 1972) that they (revolutionary Council members ) discussed the union in the cabinet and agreed upon the ratification . Prof Haroub further substantiates his argument in that one Ali Juma Shamhuna (Minister of state in chief Minister Office) , an immature young boy at that time also told him of the same while they were at the YASU club . Professor Haroub maintained the argument at a seminar held at Bwawani Hotel on 6 ^th –7 ^th April 2002 and further instated that for these reasons the Articles of Union have been ratified.

On this particular point, Abubakary Khamis Bakary (opposing) says that:

“I do not agree with him in Total. We cannot in law substantiate our arguments with hearsay or with what the Revolutionary Council Members had said during their deliberation. As Lord Denning had said (l. Denning – in the Discipline of law pg 10) that one cannot look at what the responsible Minister has said in the Parliament or what Hansard has reported. But we have to and must look at what legislation (Act) is talking about. There has to be a law enacted by the Parliament of Tanganyika separately and by the Revolutionary Council separately to ratify the Articles as required under Article viii of the Articles of the Union.” ¹¹

Ismael Jussa asserted that:

“The ratification instrument purported to have been passed by the Zanzibar Revolutionary Council was only the certified by the then Acting Solicitor General of Tanganyika P.R.N Fit foot that the law for the ratification of the Article of the union was passed by the Revolutionary Council”¹²

He added that:
One must be refreshed here that all “laws” passed by the Revolutionary Council between 1964 and 1979 ere called “Decrees) and not laws. It is evident that this “law” had been formulated in Tanganyika Official Gazette for the purpose of silencing those who would attempt to show that no ratification was made by the Zanzibar Revolutionary Council, and no more.
There is notion that Karume and Nyerere agreed on the general format of the union and left a lawyer to draft the precise agreement.
However, it is submitted that, in law the article can be presumed to have been ratified and that they are valid articles of treaty within the meaning of Vienna Convention on the law of treaties.

This concludes that the Articles of Union presumed to have been ratified on a corresponding statute called the Union of Zanzibar and Tanganyika Law (herein after referred to as the union law) which was made by the Revolutionary Council in accordance with the provisions of the Articles .The union law is in pari material to the Union Act except for the preamble and section 7 and 8(1). These are known as Acts of the Union of Tanganyika and Zanzibar.

References:
1. Miskry Ibid pg 29
2. Vienna Convention Treaty.
3. Ibid
4. Article I of the Article of Union
5. The Union: in the union of and Zanzibar Constitutions
6. Ali Saleh Ibid
7. The consolidation of Zanzibar Union – A basic Re-Appraisal pg 3-4
8. I.G Shijvi – ibid pg
9. Bagenda Ibid
10. Jumbe Ibid
11. Abubakary Ibid.
12. Ismael Jussa Ibid

Umeandika mengi na mazuri. Lakini swali langu ni simple, Je hii 'Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties' (VCLT) mnayotumia ku-argue as the governing international law, imekuwa ratified mwaka gani? Sio 1980? Does it work retrospectively?

By Chapakazi

Umeandika mengi na mazuri. Lakini swali langu ni simple, Je hii 'Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties' (VCLT) mnayotumia ku-argue as the governing international law, imekuwa ratified mwaka gani? Sio 1980? Does it work retrospectively?

The Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (or VCLT) is a treaty concerning the international law on treaties between states. It was adopted on 22 May 1969 and opened for signature on 23 May 1969.The Convention entered into force on 27 January 1980. The VCLT has been ratified by 111 states as of November 2010.(source:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vienna_Convention_on_the_Law_o f_Treaties):
Yes...Tanzania ratified the treaty too...and it does work retrospectively....not for Tanzania only but for all other countries which ratified it....

please mods unganisheni hii thread na ile ya mwanakijiji......i mean..the discussions are on the same subject....ondoeni hii maneno ya u pappet hapa....haisaidii kitu.....

By nderingosha

The Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (or VCLT) is a treaty concerning the international law on treaties between states. It was adopted on 22 May 1969 and opened for signature on 23 May 1969.The Convention entered into force on 27 January 1980. The VCLT has been ratified by 111 states as of November 2010.(source:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vienna_Convention_on_the_Law_o f_Treaties):
Yes...Tanzania ratified the treaty too...and it does work retrospectively....not for Tanzania only but for all other countries which ratified it....

Mkuu watu wanataka sana kulazimisha vitu visivyokuwepo. Kwanza sijui kama hata hiyo UN iliitambua serikali ya Mapinduzi hiyo Jan 1964 wala sidhani hadi kufikia muungano kulikuwepo na vitu hivi wanavyodai leo. Unajua zamani wazee wetu walikuwa wakioana kwa mahari ya mifugo au shamba au hata vyakula, na toka ujio wa imani za dini na udhungu watu wamekuwa wakivikana pete. Sasa leo hii nikimuuliza babu yangu mbona huna pete ya Harusi ya bibi hivyo sii mkeo nitakuwa mchizi na kulaaniwa maanake itakuwa kazi kwake kunijibu, najaribu sana kufikiria vitu ambavyo havikuwepo.

Na sielewi kama wanaelewa vizuri Mapinduzi ya Zanzibar kwamba yalifuta kabisa uhalali wa kuwepo serikali ya Sultan ambayo ilitambuliwa na UN hivyo kuzaa kitu kingine kabisa. Na baada ya hapo ndipo ikaundwa serikali ya Muungano na katiba ikaandikwa kisha ratification inafanywa na executive board ilichaguliwa kufanya kazi hiyo.

Kwa mfano tutazame Marekani. Wao nchi ziliungana wakaandika katiba yao September mwaka 1787 bila ratification halafu mwaka uliofuata ndipo illipofanywa na wajumbe wao wa congress. I qoute - "Articles Congress certified eleven ratification conventions had adopted the proposed Constitution for their states on September 13, 1788, and in accordance with its resolution, the new Constitutional government began March 4, 1789."

Ebu tujiulize, hiyo 1789 kulikuwepo na states ngapi na hivi kweli ilifanyika ktk ardhi ya kila upande au wawakilishi wa kila upande ndio walihusika na zoezi hilo?..Je, wananchi walipiga kura za maoni au kuhusishwa?. Je states ambazo hazikuwepo ktk zoezi hilo wanaweza kudai kwamba sisi hatukushirikishwa hivyo hatuutambui Muungano kwa sababu Vienna Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties (1963) haikubaliani na muundo wa Muungano wetu..Naona wadanganyika wanalewa na elimu ya vitabu maana wanasoma sana hadi wanarudia kinyumenyume - Akili nyingi sana.

By JokaKuu

Pasco,

..kwanini baraza la mapinduzi lilijadili muungano na kukubali kwa "mdomo" tu bila kuweka jambo hili ktk maandishi/ratification?

..zaidi, kwanini Baraza la wawakilishi baada ya kuundwa halikufanya marekebisho kwa ku-ratify huo mkataba wa muungano na badala yake wakaendelea na masuala mengine kama kuunganisha vyama etc etc kana kwamba everything was OK??

..mwisho, what needs to be done? what is the way forward??

Mkuu Joka Kuu, BLM walijadili na kuridhia kwa kauli tuu na sio ratification process. Tanganyika ilipofanya ratification yake, Wakaratify kwa Tanganyika na kuandika document nyingine word to word ambayo ilisainiwa na AG wa Tanganyika kuonyesha Zanzibar ili ratify, Karume na Nyerere wakaingia bunge la Tanganyika waka exchange documents kuonyesha wote waliratify!.

Mbele ya macho ya kimataifa every thing is proper na documents zipo ila kila kitu kilifanywa Tanganyika!. Nothing was done in Zanzibar!. Kesho nitaimalizia mada yangu ya ratification na nitaonyesha mchezo mzima ulivyochezwa!. Zanzibar waliuziwa mbuzi kwenye gunia!.

By Pasco

Mkuu Joka Kuu, BLM walijadili na kuridhia kwa kauli tuu na sio ratification process. Tanganyika ilipofanya ratification yake, Wakaratify kwa Tanganyika na kuandika document nyingine word to word ambayo ilisainiwa na AG wa Tanganyika kuonyesha Zanzibar ili ratify, Karume na Nyerere wakaingia bunge la Tanganyika waka exchange documents kuonyesha wote waliratify!.

BLM lilikutana lini na kuridhia kwa kauli tu?

Mimi nilifikiri hivi, 50years now after Tanganyikan independence and 46 yrs after the Union we ought to have taken a

different approach. Badala ya kudwell kwenye legality yake why dont we go to the substance? Kwanini tusiangalie

Muungano huu umetusaidiaje? What are the tangible benefits. One thing is certain, we dont need the union because it

was legal or had/has legitimacy! We need it because it is beneficial and not a loss having it. After that we will then have

to take the current settings, both sides, -politically-socially-policy wise-religion wise-economically! In these current

settings do we still need it!? then let the people say

By Mzee Mwanakijiji

BLM lilikutana lini na kuridhia kwa kauli tu?

Utanisoma ile kesho, naomba nisi priempty somo la kesho.

Nawachukia sana Wamarekani na propaganda zao. Nachukia pia yeyote anayejipendekeza kwao. Iwapo walikuja na nyuzi za uongo kuwa rais wetu alihongwa suti, namchukia pia na yeye kwa sababu anajipendekeza sana kwao. Nikiachana na hilo, mara nyingine najiuliza maswali. Watanganyika chini ya mwalimu kuna kila ushahidi wa kihistoria ndio tuliolazimisha muungano, na ndio wenye uwezo wa kuamua kuuvunja na ndiyo tunaounga'nga'nia uendelee kudumu kwa maslahi ya nani? Ikiwa wao wa Zanzibar hawakuwa na ridhaa tangu awali, na sasa wanadai kujitengea kwa maslahi yao kwa nini tunaigombea hii laana na mzigo wa lawama kutoka kwao? Binafsi nashawishika kuunga mkono harakati za kudai kujitenga kwa hawa watu kwani sioni faida yao kwetu. Mke akianza kudai taraka kwa nguvu hana faida tena kwako. Hata kama utalazimisha kuishi naye siku ukimkuta na bwana mwingine itakuaje? Tunapoteza muda bure kwa jambo dogo, inaonekana uoga wetu watanganyika kuvunja muungano huenda tunaogopa maslahi fulani yatapotea ambayo tunayapata kutoka upande wa pili. Vinginevyo hatuna sababu ya kulazimisha urafiki na rafiki anayetuchukia.

By Jumakidogo

Nawachukia sana Wamarekani na propaganda zao. Nachukia pia yeyote anayejipendekeza kwao. .... Watanganyika chini ya mwalimu kuna kila ushahidi wa kihistoria ndio tuliolazimisha muungano, na ndio wenye uwezo wa kuamua kuuvunja na ndiyo tunaounga'nga'nia uendelee kudumu kwa maslahi ya nani? ..... Binafsi nashawishika kuunga mkono harakati za kudai kujitenga kwa hawa watu kwani sioni faida yao kwetu. ...Tunapoteza muda bure kwa jambo dogo, inaonekana uoga wetu watanganyika kuvunja muungano huenda tunaogopa maslahi fulani yatapotea ambayo tunayapata kutoka upande wa pili. Vinginevyo hatuna sababu ya kulazimisha urafiki na rafiki anayetuchukia.

Ni wazi maslahi fulani yapo lakini watawala hawatueleweshi tunapata maslahi yepi.

Rafiki yako atakuchukia bila sababu? Au itakuwa umemtenda ubaya?

By Mkandara

Unazungumzia andiko gani ikiwa Zanzibar tunayoizungumzia ilitokana na Mapinduzi na sii ile ya Sultan wala bunge liloundwa kutokana na Uhuru wa mwaka 1963?. Pengine sijui kama unaweza nambia serikali gani iliyokuwepo Zanibar wakati muungano unafanyika na kina nani walikuwepo ktk kuunda muungano maana nijuavyoi mimi Karume, Abraham Babu, Hanga na baadhi ya wajumbe wengine walikuwepo ambao ndio uongozi (executive board) wa Mapinduzi tena kwa baraka za BLM sasa sielewi hiyo ratification unayozungumzia ilifanyika Bara sio Zanzibar ni ipi..

Unajua swali lako ni sawa na kusema Nyerere alichanganya mchanga upande mmoja tu hakufanya upande mwingine, Artical of Union ilisainiwa upande mmoja tu haikufanyika upande mwingine na menngineyo. Halafu sijui kama wewe wa Bara uliulizwa kuhusu Muungano huo? Ulipiga kura ya maoni kuhusiana na muungano maana hapa kila siku lawama Bara hivi bara vile mbona nasi tuliiingizwa mkenge kama hao Zanzibar.

Tatizo lenu mnashindwa kutazama circumstances led to Union. Hamfahamu kwa undani hali halisi ya upinzani ilokuwepo Zanzibar sii tu kwa ZAP bali hata ndani ya ASP kina Hanga, Nassoro Moyo na wengine walokuwa upande wa kushoto. Na pengine hujui ya kwamba vikao vya muungano vilikuwepo hata kabla ya Mapinduzi Maana unasahau kwamba chama cha African Association kilianzishwa Zanzibar, kisha likafunguliwa tawi Dar na hivyo AA ya bara ikaja kuwa TAA halafu TANU na ile ya Zanzibar wakaungana na Washiraz kuundwa ASP ushirikiano haukuanza baada ya Mapinduzi hata kidogo.

Mahusiano ya Bara na visiwani kisiasa yalikuwepo kabla kabisa ya Uhuru na huo Muungano ulikuwa moja ya vitu vya awali kabisa vilviyozungumziwa ndani ya vikao vya TANU na ASP hivyo usitake sana kuwasikia watu wa ZAP ambao kifupi ndio waliopinduliwa..na malengo haya yalitokana na mikutano mingi ya Pan Africanism ilokuwa ikifanyika kabla na baada ya Uhuru.

Hivyo kuungana kwa Tanganyika na Zanzibar ni zao la mwongozo ulokuwepo ktk kuunda Afrika moja sema tu tofauti zetu ktk umaskini, uroho wa madaraka ndio umekuwa kikwazo kikubwa kwa viongozi wa Kiafrika kufikia malengo hayo..In 60s ukizungumzia Afrika kujitenga wewe utaonekana mchawi tena hutapendwa kabisa..Sema leo tupo ktk dunia

Sawa! Iwe historia ya muungano inaanzia huko ulikosema wewe. Leo hii sasa wao wanataka kujitenga, kuna sababu ya kulazimisha kuendelea nao?

By Nonda

Ni wazi maslahi fulani yapo lakini watawala hawatueleweshi tunapata maslahi yepi.

Rafiki yako atakuchukia bila sababu? Au itakuwa umemtenda ubaya?

Inawezekana rafiki amegundua kuwa ananyonywa na kukosa fursa nyingi ambazo angepata nje ya muungano. Nadhani imefika wakati kwa rafiki huyu akapewa uhuru wa kupata fursa ambazo anaona zinapotea akiwa ndani ya ndoa. Pengine ndoa ikivunjika fursa na faida atakazopata zitatufikia pia. Ukweli uko hapa ambao tunataka kulazimisha maji kupanda mlima, Zanziba ni nchi ya kidini, udini unafifishwa kidogo na muungano. Tofauti iliyopo ni kuwa, nchi ya kidini. Imeungana na nchi isiyo ya kidini, nadhani hili watawala wetu hawakulijua tangu awali na wanatakiwa walijue sasa. Msimamo wa imani ya dini ya kiislamu unajulikana, Zanzibar ni ukanda wa kiarabu na nchi yenye msimamo wa kidini, wapo wanaoamini kuwa. Wamefanya muungano na nchi isiyostahili kwani nchi isiyo na dini ni nchi ya kikafiri. Hata hao Wazanzibar walioridhia muungano enzi hizo walilijua hili na ndiyo maana waliliridhia kwa shingo upande na wanalaaniwa mpaka leo kwa kuingiza nchi yao katika dhambi ya kuiunganisha na nchi isiyo na dini. Leo hii muungano wa Zanzibar ungedumu na usingejadiliwa kama ingeungana na Djibout, Oman, Saud Arabia na Falme za kiarabu. Huo ndio ukweli, Zanzibar ya leo wanataka kujitenga ili kujiengua katika dhambi ya kuunganishwa na nchi isiyo na msimamo wa kidini, yaani TANGANYIKA. Na tutake muungano utakufa, tusitake muungano utavunjika tu. Mchanga wa Pwani ya Zanzibar unajulikana tu, haufanani na dongo jekundu la Kongwa huko Dodoma. Hata hao kina Karume na wenzake walikuwa ni mashekhe wazuri walioiva hasa katika elimu ya madrasa. Katika nafsi zao walijua kuwa wanaungana na nchi yenye idadi kubwa ya wakristo. Ndio maana wakawa mguu ndani, mguu nje. Kwa ujumla waliunganishwa kibabe. Nadhani imefika wakati, tuone aibu. Tuwape uhuru wao, mafuta hayachanganyikani na maji.

[QUOTE=The Finest;4009302]Pasco ukipata muda tatufata hiki kitabu usome..The Union Between Tanganyika and Zanzibar: The Product Of The Cold War?

Kinasubiri nini kuwekwa mtandaoni, ?