Vifo Tabora: Uongozi wa NSSF Makao Makuu Uwajibike

[Mzee Mwanakijiji]

Sorry mkuu grammer tu... "awajibike"

thank you; Dr. Ramadhani Dau awajibike.

 

[Mzee Mwanakijiji]

Umeulizwa swali kwa nini Dr. Ramadhani Dua na si DG wa NSSF?

kukusahihisha tu anaitwa Dr. Ramadhan Dau siyo Dua.

 

[Kasheshe]

kukusahihisha tu anaitwa Dr. Ramadhan Dau siyo Dua.

Thanks mwalimu wa spelling!!!

 

[Kasheshe]

Kwa hiyo mwanakijiji kwa nini sio DG wa NSSF badala yake ni Dr. Ramadhan Dau?

 

[Game Theory]

It is about the the kids who died in tabora kwenye ukumbi wa disko ulioko kwenye jengo la NSSF taasisi ambayo inaongozwa na dr. Dau. Miaka ya hivi karibuni taasisi hiyo imekuwa ikianzisha miradi mingi ya ujezi wa majengo ya kisasa kwa ajili ya raslimali. Na imekuwa ikikodisha majengo yake kwa shughuli mbalimbali. Hata hivyo jengo hili ambalo watoto hawa wamefia lilikuwa ni kwa ajili ya shughuli za ofisi; NSSF hawakulijenga kwa ajili ya ukumbbi wa muziki. Ndio maana nimesema kuwa Dr. Ramadhani Dau awajibike. Natumaini nimekurudisha kwenye mstari.

Hili linahusu watoto 19 wa Kitanzania waliokufa kwenye jengo la NSSF ambalo sehemu yake walikodisha kwa wafanyabiashara ambao wamelitumia kama ukumbi wa disko. Wao NSSF walilijenga kwa shughuli za ofisi lakini kutokana na tamaa ya fedha na uwekezaji wakakubali litumike kama ukumbi wa disko. Hii NSSF inaongozwa na Dr. Ramadhani Dau na hivyo the buck on the end stops with Dr. Dau.

ndio maana nimesema awajibike.

thank you; Dr. Ramadhani Dau awajibike.

kukusahihisha tu anaitwa Dr. Ramadhan Dau siyo Dua.

It is a waste of time niggler because you are not some kind of scintillating intellectual razor, slicing apart other people's arguments. You are just an annoying irritant.


You areguments are specious, tendentious and juvenile. They would be embarrassing in the context of a school debating society and I am frankly amazed that you keep on going. Mind you, I am also amazed that people still agree to collude with you in your inanities.

 

[Mpita Njia]

Mkuu GT, naomba ujitofautishe na mwanakijiji ili wafuatiliaji tuweze kuchambua. Unamtuhumu Mwanakijiji kwa bias na kuwahukumu watu wakati na wewe mwenyewe (kwa mtazamo wangu) unaacha kuijadili hoja na kuanza kumhukumu Mwanakijiji!

 

[Mzee Mwanakijiji]

Na sisi kama expert members ngoja tunogeshe hoja,japo ninapinga wale wanaoattack watu moja kwa moja badala ya hoja.Kisheria issue ya maana hapa ni wapi kwa kulaza blameworthiness,haijalishi iwapo nssf ni wamiliki au la?
maswali ya msingi ni je?
1.Vifo vimetokea katika eneo linalomilikiwa na nani?
2.Je,wakati vifo vinatokea nani alikuwa na diect control ya hilo jengo?
3.Je,vifo vilitokana na kukosa hewa kulikosababishwa na kufail kwa miundo mbinu ya jengo au sababu nyingine?
4.kama hilo juu sio jawabu je?vifo hivyo vinaweza kuwa vimetokana na hitilafu ndani ya jengo ikiwemo jengo kudondoka au kifaa chochote ndani ya jengo hilo ikiwemo hitilafu ya umeme?
4.Kama sio je,vilitokea kwa sababu ya mkanyagano kama ilivyoripotiwa?kama jibu ni ndiyo
5.Je,mkanyagano huo ulisababishwa na nini?(kuna kitu kiliwashtua watoto hao?humo ndani ama tu ni kwa sababu ya kugombaniana oxygen ndogo iliyokuwamo humo ndani?
6.Je,ni hatua zipi za haraka zilizochukuliwa na wahusika baaada ya kuona watoto wamezidiwa au watoto wamewazidi nguvu na hivyo ukumbi kuchukua idadi kubwa ya watu zaidi ya uwezo wao?

Hoja hizi na nyingine ziakazoboreshwa hapa ndizo zitakazosaidia kuifanya nssf responsible au mwendesha ukumbi yaani mpangaji.Hata hivyo at a glance line yangu ya argument inanifanya niende upande wa ocupiers liability act,ambayo pia hapa Tanzania tunayo.Kwa mujibu wa sheria hii occupier sio lazima awe mmiliki,hata mpangaji tu anaweza kuwa occupier,kwa maana hiyo karata yangu ya kwanza kabisa naitupa kwa occupier kabla ya kwenda kwa mmiliki,nikimkosa occupier the secod premise naenda kwa owner(proprietor).Kwa maana hiyo basi na kwa faida ya JF ndio maana nimeamua kutoa hii piece of knowledge kuhusu my lie of argument ili kila mtu anielewe kwanini nachukua that line of argument.

THE LAW ON OCCUPIER'S LIABILITY

The liability to visitors is covered by the Occupiers' Liability Act 1957 and the Occupiers' Liability Act 1984.



The 1957 Act deals with lawful visitors and the 1984 Act deals with trespassers.



The occupier means the person in control of the land, building, premises, shop, warehouse, car park etc – in fact, the 1957 Act has even been held to cover ships, hovercraft, scaffolding and quaysides, the scope is quite wide indeed. The ‘occupier' might be a local authority, a company, an individual or a partnership.



The acknowledged test for ‘occupation' can be found in the case of Wheat –v- Lacon [1966] AC 552. It was said ...... "Wherever a person has a sufficient degree of control over premises that he ought to realise that any failure on his part to use care may result in injury to a person lawfully there ......"



S2 (2) of the Act is quite clear, it states ...... "The common duty of care is a duty to take such care as in all the circumstances of the case is reasonable to see that the visitor will be reasonably safe in using the premises for the purpose for which he is invited or permitted to be there ....."



Interestingly, the Act acknowledges that "..... an occupier must be prepared for children to be less careful that adults ....." [S2 (3)a].



In Glasgow –v- Taylor [1922] 1 AC 44, the corporation council were found liable when a young child ate poisonous berries in a municipal park. Similarly, in Jolley –v- Sutton LBC [2000] 3 All ER 409, (an interesting case of ‘allurement'), the House of Lords decided that a boy who was injured when a small boat he had propped up (on council land) fell on him, could claim compensation from the occupiers' of the land, i.e. the council.



In Dawson –v- Scottish Power Plc [1999-SL1] the court found Scottish Power liable when an eleven year old boy had climbed over the fence surrounding an electricity sub-station, was electrocuted. The boy was found one third contributory negligent. The fence was six feet high, but soil had built up at the base of the fence, making it only four feet high. By the way, the fence was topped with spikes and had warning notices stating ‘Danger of death – Keep out'.



In all these cases, the courts found that it was reasonably foreseeable that a child would become injured due to the occupier's negligence.



Rather sensibly, the 1957 Act recognises that experts working on the property will "..... appreciate and guard against any special risks ....." S2 (3)b. So, in Roles –V- Nathan [1963] 1 WLR 1117, the occupier was not held liable for the death of two chimney sweeps by reason of carbon monoxide and in General Cleaning Contractors –v- Christmas (that was the man's name by the way) [1953] AC 180 the occupier was not liable when their window closed on Christmas' hand, causing him to fall. As a window cleaner, he should have taken such precautions to prevent this – he should have been aware of the special risks – after all, he was a window cleaner'! In any event, his employer was liable as they had not provided a safe system of work (that's another interesting area of tort law).



Generally, warning signs and notices should be specific. It is not enough for an occupier to erect a sign stating ‘BEWARE' or ‘DANGEROUS'. In Staples –v- West Dorset District Council [1995] 93 LGR 536, the Court of Appeal found for the council. Simply, when you walk on slippery stones (on the Cobb at Lyme Regis), there is a good chance you will slip and fall. You don't really need a warning sign now do you?



By the way, if you see a sign that says something like ‘We do not accept responsibility fro injury caused on these premises', it's unlawful by reason of the Unfair Contracts Act 1977 S2 (1). But, of course, the occupiers know that and hope that you don't.



Now, the 1984 Act is somewhat different. It deals with the duty owed to persons ‘other than visitors' and by this it means ‘trespassers' – people using a private right of way and oddly, people visiting National Parks. S1 (3) of the 1984 Act states the occupier owes a duty if:



a) He is aware of the danger.

b) He knows/has reasonable ground to believe that the person is in the vicinity of the danger.

c) He should be reasonably expected to offer the person some protection.



S1 (6) provides that no duty is owed to persons who willingly accepts risks. This was the main point of Tomlinson –v- Congleton [2004] 1 AC 46, where the claimant became injured when he dived into a pool at a country park. He ignored the warning signs and became seriously injured. When he entered the water, he became a trespasser. The defendants (relied on Scrutthon's LJ opinion in The Carlgarth [1927] P93 11 "..... When you invite a person into your house to use the staircase, you do not invite him to slide down the banisters ....."



In Tomlinson, Lord Hobhouse said "..... Does the law require that all trees be cut down because some youths may climb them and fall? Does the law require the coastline and other beauty spots to be lined with warning notices? ....." The answer to all these questions, is of course, no.



And remember, an occupier cannot be prosecuted using these Acts, they refer to civil actions only.



If you want to make a personal injury claim, click Personal injury professional accident compensation claims UK - Daisy Chain Compensation Claim in England, Wales, Scotland. We'll be pleased to help you with your compensation claim.

Asante sana kwa hii kwani hapa tunaweza kuzungumza vizuri na upande wako wa kisheria utakuwa msaada mkubwa.

a. Je katika mazingira haya ni sheria hiyo pekee yake ndiyo inapaswa kuangaliwa?
b. Je katika kifo kinachotokana na ujenzi mbaya mwenye liability ni mkaaji/mpangaji tu au mjenzi ambaye anapaswa kujenga to a certain standard?
c. Je wajibu wa mmiliki wa jengo ambaye ameruhusu activity fulani kufanywa na mpangaji, activity ambayo imeweza kusababisha madhara ndani ya jengo hilo kwa mtu mwingine wa nje ukoje?


Katika kuwajibika nilikoitisha sikusema lolote kuhusu kuwajibika mahakamani au kisheria. Bado watu wanasoma mengi kuliko niliyosema. Lakini kwa vile kuna suala la kisheria ni lazima tutambue pia kuwa mtu/taasisi inaweze isiwajibishwe kwenye sheria za jinai lakini akaweza kuwajibishwa kwa sheria za madai (unaweza kunisahahihisha kama nakosea).

Kuhusu Dau;

nimeweza kuelezea kwenye sehemu kadhaa humu kuwa siyo kama mtu binafsi bali kama Mkurugenzi wa NSSF. AKiondoka leo atakuwa amewajibika kwani yaliyotokea yametokea wakati yeye akiwa ndio Mkurugenzi. Itakuwa ni upuuzi kumwajibisha mtu ambaye hakuwepo wakati tukio hili linatokea.

Wakati mauaji yametokea Shinyanga, Mwinyi aliwajibika in his capacity as the Minister of Internal Affairs.

 

[Mzee Mwanakijiji]

Kwa hiyo mwanakijiji kwa nini sio DG wa NSSF badala yake ni Dr. Ramadhan Dau?

Ukisoma utaona nimerudia sehemu nyingi nikimtaja kama ni kutokana na nafasi yake kama Mkurugenzi wa NSSF. Kama wakati mwingine nimesema "Lowassa ajiuzulu" sikuhitaji kuanza kuandika Waziri Mkuu .... watu walijua nazungumzia nini na waliposoma wakaona kuwa siyo suala la Lowassa kama Lowassa bali Lowassa kama Waziri Mkuu.

Kuwajibika kwa Dr. Dau kunapaswa kutokana na nafasi yake kama Mkurugenzi Mtendaji wa NSSF na si vinginevyo.

 

[Mag3]

It is a waste of time niggler because you are not some kind of scintillating intellectual razor, slicing apart other people's arguments. You are just an annoying irritant.


You areguments are specious, tendentious and juvenile. They would be embarrassing in the context of a school debating society and I am frankly amazed that you keep on going. Mind you, I am also amazed that people still agree to collude with you in your inanities.

Oh give me a break and take another time out. I hope JF was designed to hold the amount of vitriol being poured here without any danger of suffocation. It is starting to sound like somebody is being driven by a complex so entwined in a labyrinth of inferiority that common sense of reasoning is overshadowed. The end result is name calling that immediately backfires and exposes ones real motive as cheap attempt to bring somebody down to his level. Count me out.

 

[Augustoons]

Asante sana kwa hii kwani hapa tunaweza kuzungumza vizuri na upande wako wa kisheria utakuwa msaada mkubwa.

a. Je katika mazingira haya ni sheria hiyo pekee yake ndiyo inapaswa kuangaliwa?
b. Je katika kifo kinachotokana na ujenzi mbaya mwenye liability ni mkaaji/mpangaji tu au mjenzi ambaye anapaswa kujenga to a certain standard?
c. Je wajibu wa mmiliki wa jengo ambaye ameruhusu activity fulani kufanywa na mpangaji, activity ambayo imeweza kusababisha madhara ndani ya jengo hilo kwa mtu mwingine wa nje ukoje?


Katika kuwajibika nilikoitisha sikusema lolote kuhusu kuwajibika mahakamani au kisheria. Bado watu wanasoma mengi kuliko niliyosema. Lakini kwa vile kuna suala la kisheria ni lazima tutambue pia kuwa mtu/taasisi inaweze isiwajibishwe kwenye sheria za jinai lakini akaweza kuwajibishwa kwa sheria za madai (unaweza kunisahahihisha kama nakosea).

Kuhusu Dau;

nimeweza kuelezea kwenye sehemu kadhaa humu kuwa siyo kama mtu binafsi bali kama Mkurugenzi wa NSSF. AKiondoka leo atakuwa amewajibika kwani yaliyotokea yametokea wakati yeye akiwa ndio Mkurugenzi. Itakuwa ni upuuzi kumwajibisha mtu ambaye hakuwepo wakati tukio hili linatokea.

Wakati mauaji yametokea Shinyanga, Mwinyi aliwajibika in his capacity as the Minister of Internal Affairs.

Ministerial responsibility ina mipaka yake,inawahusu wale waliochaguliwa ama kuteuliwa kwenye nafasi za kisiasa,na origin ya doctrine hii ni katika baraza la mawaziri,na ndio maana mawaziri wanawajibika hata kama kitu hawakufanya wao.Lakini inapotokea mtu aliyepo kwenye cheo cha utendaji kama Dr.Dau kanuni inayompasa yeye kujiuzulu sio ya ministerial responsibility moja kwa moja bali ni ya kiutendaji zaidi(aither kwa kutakiwa kujiuzulu na wakubwa zake kabla hajafukuzwa kazi ama kwa kufuatala moral conviction tu),anakuwa halazimiki sana kama walivyo mawaziri.Sasa kwa mfano kosa likawa linaonekana lipo wazi kabisa kwa Dau lakini bado anakataa kujiuzulu na waziri hamchukulii hatua yoyote,hapo ina maana waziri ndio anapaswa kuwajibika kwa kushindwa kumwajibisha aliye chini yake ukijumlisha na ukubwa wa kosa lililotendeke.

Ndio maana katika hali hiyo waziri au mkuu wa kazi anakuandikia barua akitaka wewe mwenyewe uwajibike au usubiri kuwajibishwa na hatua zote mbili hapo juu zina results tofauti.K

kUHUSU SHERIA
Si sheria hiyo tu inayotumika hapo zipo kama mbili tatu lakini hii ya hapa ni ya madai,lakini katika jinai pia unaweza kushikilwa na polisi japo kesi nyingi za namna hiyo huwa zinakuwa ngumu sana kwa prosecutio hasa kuprove culpability.

Na kama issue ni ujenzi mbaya hapo muhusika moja kwa moja ni owner na contractor na ndio maana pale awali nilisema,inategemea kama watoto wamekufa kutokana na kuangukiwa na kitu ndani ya jengo hilo au kingine chochote kinachosababisha negligence kwa contractor au owner lakini kama issue ni watu kuzidi basi ni occupier

Hiyo hoja ya tatu sina hakika sana kama ina hold water na ni kwa sheria gani ambayo inadhibiti matumizi katika majengo,it equires further research.

Kwa tips hizi chache naomba kuwasilisha kwani nakimbilia mahali nitarudi muda si mrefu au kesho

 

[Kuhani]

Cheap tickets
BBC NEWS

Tabora regional police commander Daudi Siasi was quoted as saying that the hall had a capacity of 200 but more than double that number were inside at the time of the disaster.

The hall was said to be overcrowded after cheap tickets had gone on sale.

Iwapo chanzo cha maafa ni wauza tiketi, kuna mwingine wa kulaumiwa kuhusika kwa namna moja au nyingine?

 

[Mzee Mwanakijiji]

Iwapo chanzo cha maafa ni wauza tiketi, kuna mwingine wa kulaumiwa kuhusika kwa namna moja au nyingine?

you must be kidding me... ok.. yaishe basi kosa ni la wauza tiketi!.

 

[Mzee Mwanakijiji]

Ministerial responsibility ina mipaka yake,inawahusu wale waliochaguliwa ama kuteuliwa kwenye nafasi za kisiasa,na origin ya doctrine hii ni katika baraza la mawaziri,na ndio maana mawaziri wanawajibika hata kama kitu hawakufanya wao.Lakini inapotokea mtu aliyepo kwenye cheo cha utendaji kama Dr.Dau kanuni inayompasa yeye kujiuzulu sio ya ministerial responsibility moja kwa moja bali ni ya kiutendaji zaidi(aither kwa kutakiwa kujiuzulu na wakubwa zake kabla hajafukuzwa kazi ama kwa kufuatala moral conviction tu),anakuwa halazimiki sana kama walivyo mawaziri.Sasa kwa mfano kosa likawa linaonekana lipo wazi kabisa kwa Dau lakini bado anakataa kujiuzulu na waziri hamchukulii hatua yoyote,hapo ina maana waziri ndio anapaswa kuwajibika kwa kushindwa kumwajibisha aliye chini yake ukijumlisha na ukubwa wa kosa lililotendeke.

Ndio maana katika hali hiyo waziri au mkuu wa kazi anakuandikia barua akitaka wewe mwenyewe uwajibike au usubiri kuwajibishwa na hatua zote mbili hapo juu zina results tofauti.K

kUHUSU SHERIA
Si sheria hiyo tu inayotumika hapo zipo kama mbili tatu lakini hii ya hapa ni ya madai,lakini katika jinai pia unaweza kushikilwa na polisi japo kesi nyingi za namna hiyo huwa zinakuwa ngumu sana kwa prosecutio hasa kuprove culpability.

Na kama issue ni ujenzi mbaya hapo muhusika moja kwa moja ni owner na contractor na ndio maana pale awali nilisema,inategemea kama watoto wamekufa kutokana na kuangukiwa na kitu ndani ya jengo hilo au kingine chochote kinachosababisha negligence kwa contractor au owner lakini kama issue ni watu kuzidi basi ni occupier

Hiyo hoja ya tatu sina hakika sana kama ina hold water na ni kwa sheria gani ambayo inadhibiti matumizi katika majengo,it equires further research.

Kwa tips hizi chache naomba kuwasilisha kwani nakimbilia mahali nitarudi muda si mrefu au kesho

Nimekupata; unachosema ni kuwa inapokuja suala la sheria it is not a white and black thing. Kuna mambo mengi ya kuangalia. Kwamba siyo kuangalia sheria moja tu na kushangilia kuwa "gotcha" bali umejaribu kutuonesha jinsi suala hili likija kisheria linavyoweza kuwa complex. Shukrani.

 

[Gamba la Nyoka]

Asante sana kwa hii kwani hapa tunaweza kuzungumza vizuri na upande wako wa kisheria utakuwa msaada mkubwa.

a. Je katika mazingira haya ni sheria hiyo pekee yake ndiyo inapaswa kuangaliwa?
b. Je katika kifo kinachotokana na ujenzi mbaya mwenye liability ni mkaaji/mpangaji tu au mjenzi ambaye anapaswa kujenga to a certain standard?
c. Je wajibu wa mmiliki wa jengo ambaye ameruhusu activity fulani kufanywa na mpangaji, activity ambayo imeweza kusababisha madhara ndani ya jengo hilo kwa mtu mwingine wa nje ukoje?


Katika kuwajibika nilikoitisha sikusema lolote kuhusu kuwajibika mahakamani au kisheria. Bado watu wanasoma mengi kuliko niliyosema. Lakini kwa vile kuna suala la kisheria ni lazima tutambue pia kuwa mtu/taasisi inaweze isiwajibishwe kwenye sheria za jinai lakini akaweza kuwajibishwa kwa sheria za madai (unaweza kunisahahihisha kama nakosea).

Kuhusu Dau;

nimeweza kuelezea kwenye sehemu kadhaa humu kuwa siyo kama mtu binafsi bali kama Mkurugenzi wa NSSF. AKiondoka leo atakuwa amewajibika kwani yaliyotokea yametokea wakati yeye akiwa ndio Mkurugenzi. Itakuwa ni upuuzi kumwajibisha mtu ambaye hakuwepo wakati tukio hili linatokea.
Wakati mauaji yametokea Shinyanga, Mwinyi aliwajibika in his capacity as the Minister of Internal Affairs.

hivi akiondoka atakuwa amewajibika?. je mwanakijiji unataka aondoke ili awe amewajibika?. hebu once and for all settle hii ishu, unataka awajibike kwa kuondoka au unataka awajibike kwa kufanya kazi kwa ufanisi zaidi?. hebu jaribu kushuka chini kidogo kutoka katika "ozonosphere"uje katika "atmosphere"
mahali ambapo fikra kwa kusaidiwa na macho vinaweza kuona japo kwa kuangaza angaza.

 

[Kuhani]

you must be kidding me... ok.. yaishe basi kosa ni la wauza tiketi!.

Nimeuliza swali tu, mbona wawaka yakhe ?

Wasema yaishe, kwani ilikuwa ushindani ?

Nimetaka kuelimishwa tu: mmiliki wa jengo kakupangisha sehemu, halafu wewe ukaenda pakia watu kwenye sherehe kupita kipimo, yakatokea maafa, tutasema kosa la mwenye jengo ?

 

[Victoire]

Mambo ya MV BUKOBA!

 

[Mzee Mwanakijiji]

Nimeuliza swali tu, mbona wawaka yakhe ?

Wasema yaishe, kwani ilikuwa ushindani ?

Nimetaka kuelimishwa tu: mmiliki wa jengo kakupangisha sehemu, halafu wewe ukaenda pakia watu kwenye sherehe kupita kipimo, yakatokea maafa, tutasema kosa la mwenye jengo ?

RAPHAEL LUCAS in Tabora
Daily News; Thursday,October 02, 2008 @19:01
President Jakaya Kikwete has sent condolences to the families of 19 children who died in a discotheque when celebrating Idd el Fitr, calling for a thorough investigation into the matter -and stern measures taken against all those involved. Six other children are hospitalized, two of them in critical condition, following the incident.

The owner of the club, Mr Shashi Patel, is under police custody as authorities continue with investigations. The Minister for Labour, Employment and Youth Development, Prof Juma Kapuya, said that the president had also given 500,000/- to the families of children who perished in the accident.

Prof. Kapuya said that President Kikwete received with profound shock the children's death that occurred at around 6:30 pm at Bubbles Night Club within Tabora municipality on Wednesday. According to the Tabora Acting Regional Police Commander, Mr Daudi Siasi, the tragedy struck after the children suffocated within the club's overheated poorly ventilated dance floor.
Tabora municipality is at the moment very hot with temperatures recorded at over 33 degrees Centigrade. The children who perished were aged between 7 and 15 years. Reports from Tabora say that the Uyui District Medical Officer, Dr Moses Makelele, lost two children in the tragedy. His wife passed away three weeks ago.

The National Social Security Fund (NSSF), owners of the building that houses the club, have also promised to give another 500,000/- to the families of each of the children that died in the tragedy and 100,000/- to the families of the injured children.

Tabora regional authorities have given each family of the deceased children 50,000/- and the go-ahead for them to bury their dead. Mr Siasi identified those who died in the incident as Veronica Manigu (7), Beatrice Makelele (14), Jacob Gerald (12), Salma Hamis (12), Khadija Waziri (13), Rehema Moto (14), Selemani Iddi (11), Mrisho Selemani (10), Abdallah Rehani (14) and Agatha Manigu (12).

Others are Paulina Emmanuel (11), Mohammed Kapaya (15), Ramla Yenga (15), Habiba Shabani (15), Donald Kasera (12), Mwanahamisi Waziri (11), Philipo Haule (11), Ashura Jacob (12) and Yasini Rashidi (11). Those injured are Msimu Rehani (14), Tatu Amani (15), Kulwa Iddi (12), Sakina Alli (10); the latter was discharged but later returned to hospital. Two of the casualties are in critical condition – Jumanne Abdullah (age not immediately established) and Naomi Joseph (13).

My Take:
Kuhani unafikiri kosa linaweza kuwa kwenye wauza tiketi au hili analodai Kamanda hapa? Sorry hapo juu I'm getting frustrated. Hili tukio limenigusa kwa namna fulani ambayo bado sijapata maneno mazuri ya kuelezea.

Na kwenye kuwajibika naamini itabidi iende even higher than Dr. Dau. Naifikiria bodi nzima hasa kama uwekezaji huo wa ukumbi wa disko hauna mantiki kiuchumi kwa NSSF kuingia.

 

[Insurgent]

This issue is very clear...
Mwanakijiji either una personal vendetta against Dau au uliteleza. Kuruka ngazi zote kuanzia kwa:
- Aliyekodisha jengo (aliyefanya hiyo sherehe)
- Doormen waliokuwa wanaingiza watu
- Manispaa
- Regional Chief Manager
- etc etc

na kuruka moja kwa moja kwa Dau...hata mimi nimeshangaa. WHY DAU?!!

Mfano aliotoa Kuhani unatosha, labda na mimi niongezee:

Una kampuni ya kukodisha magari, unamkodishia mtu gari. Jamaa anakwenda kupiga kinywaji na kugonga mtu. Sasa turuke na kumshika mwenye gari au dereva mlevi?
Wangwe alimpa yule kijana gari aendeshe wakati yeye amelala. Mwenye gari ni Wangwe..tusimshike yule kijana wala kumwajibisha turukie kumwajibisha Marehemu Wangwe(mwenye gari).

Mkijiji umeleta taarifa ya kusikitisha kuhusu maafa LAKINI ni wazi uko BIASED against Dau. Kwanini isiwe "Wahusika wa maafa ya Tabora wawajibishwe?". Kwanini uliruka kwa Dau? Nipe mwanga hapa...

Kinachosikitisha zaidi ni kujaribu kutumia mauti yaliyowapata watoto katika kumwadhibu adui yako. Kila mahali unasema wewe unajali kuhusu watoto...lakini huangalii nani wa kulaumiwa kwa sababu unaye tayari.

 

[Sober]

"According to the Tabora Acting Regional Police Commander, Mr Daudi Siasi, the tragedy struck after the children suffocated within the club's overheated poorly ventilated dance floor."

Point of caution:

the assumption here is such that the number of people in the hall were within the specified number that the hall can hold, which was not the case. We are told the hall's capacity is 100 people, but at the time of the tragedy there were more than 500 people. If the ventilation system was for 100, then it was only a matter of time before people suffocated.

Lets find some more convincing evidence before judging.

 

[Mzee Mwanakijiji]

This issue is very clear...
Mwanakijiji either una personal vendetta against Dau au uliteleza. Kuruka ngazi zote kuanzia kwa:
- Aliyekodisha jengo (aliyefanya hiyo sherehe)
- Doormen waliokuwa wanaingiza watu
- Manispaa
- Regional Chief Manager
- etc etc

na kuruka moja kwa moja kwa Dau...hata mimi nimeshangaa. WHY DAU?!!

Mfano aliotoa Kuhani unatosha, labda na mimi niongezee:

Una kampuni ya kukodisha magari, unamkodishia mtu gari. Jamaa anakwenda kupiga kinywaji na kugonga mtu. Sasa turuke na kumshika mwenye gari au dereva mlevi?
Wangwe alimpa yule kijana gari aendeshe wakati yeye amelala. Mwenye gari ni Wangwe..tusimshike yule kijana wala kumwajibisha turukie kumwajibisha Marehemu Wangwe(mwenye gari).

Mkijiji umeleta taarifa ya kusikitisha kuhusu maafa LAKINI ni wazi uko BIASED against Dau. Kwanini isiwe "Wahusika wa maafa ya Tabora wawajibishwe?". Kwanini uliruka kwa Dau? Nipe mwanga hapa...

Kinachosikitisha zaidi ni kujaribu kutumia mauti yaliyowapata watoto katika kumwadhibu adui yako. Kila mahali unasema wewe unajali kuhusu watoto...lakini huangalii nani wa kulaumiwa kwa sababu unaye tayari.

Hivi Dr. Dau hazungumzwi? yaani watu wengine wote tuweze kuwazungumza ile akiguswa Dr. Dau ndio inakuwa vurugu? Katika kujenga hoja kwa upande wangu nimeanzia na Dau. Neno langu siyo la mwisho na haliwezi kuwa la mwisho. Wewe unaweza kuona watu wengine n.k Utaona kwenye posti yangu nilisema "mtu wa kwanza" hayo ni maoni yangu. Kama una maoni tofauti weka tu, kama unaona hawajibiki sema hawajibiki; kama unaona kuna mtu mwingine anahusika jenga hoja. Sijadai neno la mwisho kwenye hili. Huo ni msimamo wangu na bado ninasimamia; NSSF iwajibishwe na mtu wa kwanza anayeonekana kuhusu NSSF ni mkurugenzi wake ni Dr. Dau na pamoja naye ni kina Blandina Nyoni na sitosikia vibaya kama bodi nzima ikiwajibika/wajibishwa kwa mkataba wao na hawa wachezesha disco.

Unless unataka kusema kuwa NSSF isiguswe kabisa. Kama mnataka tusiiguse NSSF kwa lolote semeni tu nitaacha maana naona kuna miti mitakatifu Tanzania ambayo haipaswi kunyoshewa vidole.