Verdict on independent candidates out Thursday
By Bernard James
THE CITIZEN
A ruling on whether or not independent candidates should be allowed to contest for electoral posts in Tanzania will be made on Thursday.
Chief Justice Augustino Ramadhani is expected to lead a panel of seven judges to make the historic decision, The Citizen has reliably learnt.
The full bench will deliver the eagerly awaited verdict that could change Tanzania's political landscape with only four months remaining before the country's General Election slated for October.
There is no doubt that whatever decision is pronounced by the Court of Appeal will set a landmark precedent on Tanzanian citizens' participation in the country's public affairs. It is also likely to have a resounding effect on the rest of the five East African Community (EAC) member states that are yet to confront a similar political challenge.
The verdict of the High Court will further answer the question as to whether or not it has powers to declare invalid the provision of the constitution as it did when allowing independent candidates in elections 16 years ago.
Individuals seeking to participate in public affairs, but not through political parties, are keenly waiting to hear what the court will decide after ten years of apparent government's attempts to block independent candidates.
The push for independent candidates was initiated 16 years ago when the outspoken leader of Democratic Party (DP), Reverend Christopher Mtikila, filed a constitutional petition to enforce his basic right to participate in public affairs without being forced to join a political party.
In October 1994 Justice Kahwa Rugakingira declared unconstitutional provisions of the constitution restricting independent candidates in a decision that appeared to have dealt a serious blow on the government which quickly resorted to desperate attempts to block independent candidates.
He was of the firm view that amendments were capable of being abused to confine the right of governing to a few and render illusory the emergence of a truly democratic society in Tanzania.
The Attorney General appealed against the decision, but made a u-turn to abandon the appeal. He then rushed a bill through parliament that saw some articles of the constitution amended to make it mandatory for any Tanzanian wishing to contest for the presidency or as an MP to first join a political party.
Aggrieved Mtikila challenged the amendments in the High Court and again won. But the government went to the Court of Appeal to challenge the verdict on the ground that the making of laws was the preserve of parliament.
The government also wanted the Court of Appeal to determine whether the High Court, itself a creation of the constitution, has powers to rule over the same constitution.
At the hearing of the appeal, a renowned constitutional lawyer, Professor Palamagamba Kabudi and a prominent public law professor Jwani Mwaikusa were called as amicus curiae (friends of the court) to assist the court arrive at a just and unshaken decision.
The two, together with the Zanzibar Director of Public Prosecution, Mr Othman Masoud, were asked to assist the court determine whether the High Court, itself the creation of the constitution, has powers to declare invalid any provision of the constitution.
Professor Kabudi, who teaches at the University of Dar es Salaam's School of Law, strongly defended his position that the court did not have powers to declare unconstitutional amendments made to the constitution.
Said he: "The general rule is that the court has no powers to declare as invalid a provision in the constitution, but there are exceptions which must be narrowly interpreted in a stricter manner because the constitution is the supreme law of the country."
His views, however, sharply differed with those of his colleague, Professor Mwaikusa, who maintained that the High Court had the jurisdiction to declare invalid any provision of the constitution as provided under article 108 of the same constitution.
The long serving public law Professor told the panel that powers of the High Court were unlimited when it came to safeguarding and protecting basic rights of a citizen.
He said it would be contradictory for the constitution to take away the powers of the court to protect basic rights.
"Precluding the court from protecting that right is to abrogate that right. No constitution can take away basic right and yet remain valid in a democratic society," he argued.
According to professor Mwaikusa, basic rights which formed the basis of Mtikila's petition were not gifts from the state and were not creatures of the constitution.
The director of elections with the National Electoral Commission (NEC), Mr Rajabu Kiravu, ruled out the possibility of having independent candidates in this year's General Election when he was called to tell the court how prepared the electoral body was if the judges were to rule in favour of independent candidates.
He told the court that major preparations on the election were made without regard to independent candidates and that any order of the court for it to fit in solo candidates would frustrate the General Election.