Mhariri wa Mwananchi, Theophil Makunga, naye kuburuzwa Mahakamani leo!

ritz said:
Tatizo kubwa la wana habari wa Tanzania uwa ni mawakala wa vyama vya siasa...hawapo kwa ajili ya Wananchi siku maji yakiwafika shingoni ndio wanatafuta support kwa Wananchi...
Click to expand...
Ni kweli wapo mawakala wa vyama vya siasa kama Uhuru na Mzalendo, Habari leo, Jambo leo & co.
 
Uzuri siku hizi kuna social media. Watakamakamata hao waandishi wa habari na kuwaweka ndani lakini hawataweza kuwakamata wamiliki wa fesibuku, twitter na youtube where the citizen journalists publish their real time news.
 
Sitarajii serikali hii ya ccm na kwa sasa hii ya Kikwete kupeleka bungeni muswada wa marekebisho ya sheria hii namba 3 ya mwaka 1976.

Je, haiwezekani kwa mbunge mmoja kupeleka bungeni hoja binafsi ya kuifanyia marekebisho sheria hiyo kama sio kufutwa kabisa? Hili bunge la sasa limejaa wanasheria, hakuna hata mmoja aliyewahi kufikiria jambo hili?
Tangu tume ya Nyalali ilipoiainisha sheria hii kuwa miongoni mwa sheria 40 zinazotakiwa kufutwa ama kufanyiwa marekebisho, hajawahi kutokea mbunge yeyote kupeleka hoja binafsi kutaka marekebisho ya hii sheria? hata mbunge mwanahabri kitaaluma, hakuna anayeweza kujaribu kutukwamua katika hili?
 
Pasco said:
Wanabodi,


Mzizi wa fitna yote hii ni Sheria ya Magazeti ya Mwaka 1976. Hii ni moja ya sheria 40 za ukandamizaji, zilizotajwa na Tume ya Nyalali. Kesi hizi ndio opportunity pekee ya kushinikiza hii sheria iwe scrapped of from the books of laws kabla ya katiba mpya Julai, 2014!

31.-(1) A ''seditious intention'' is an intention-
(a) to bring into hatred or contempt or to excite disaffection against the lawful authority of the United Republic or the Government thereof; or
(b) to excite any of the inhabitants of the United Republic to attempt to procure the alteration, otherwise than by lawful means, of any other matter in the United Republic as by law established; or
(c) to bring into hatred or contempt or to excite disaffection against the administration of justice in the United Republic; or
(d) to raise discontent or disaffection amongst any of the inhabitants of the United Republic; or
(e) to promote feelings of ill-will and hostility between different categories of the population of the United Republic.
(2) An act, speech or publication is not seditious by reason only that it intends-
(a) to show that the government has been misled or mistaken in any of its measures; or
(b) to point out errors or defects in the government or constitution of the United Republic as by law established or in legislation
or in the administration of justice with a view to the remedyingof such errors or defects; or
(c) to persuade any inhabitants of the United Republic to attempt to procure by lawful mean the alteration of any matter in the United Republic as by law established; or
(d) to point out, with a view to their removal, any matters which are producing, or have a tendency to produce feelings Of ill-will and enmity between different categories of the population of the United Republic.
(3) In determining whether the intention the with which any act was done, any words were spoken or any document was published, was or was not seditious, every person shall be deemed to intend the consequences which would naturally follow from his conduct at the time and in the
circumstances in which he so conducted himself-
32.-(1) Any Person who
(a) does or attempts to do, or makes any preparation to do, or conspires with any person to do, any act with a seditious intention;
(b) utters any words with a seditious intention;
(c) prints, publishes, sells, offers for sale. distributes or reproduces any seditious publication;
(d) imports any seditious publication, unless he has no reason to believe that it is seditious,
shall be guilty of an offence and shall be liable upon conviction for the first offence to a fine not exceeding ten thousand shillings or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years or to both such fine and imprisonment , and for a subsequent offence to a fine no exceeding fifteen thousand shillings or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding three years or to both such fine and imprisonment; and such publication shall be forfeited to the Republic-
(2) Any person who, without lawful excuse, has in his possession any seditious publication shall be guilty of an Offence and shall be liable upon conviction for the first offence to a fine exceeding five thousand shillings or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding twelve months or to both such fine and imprisonment, and for a subsequent offence to a fine not exceeding ten thousand shilling or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two year or to both such fine and imprisonment.
(3) It shall be a defence to a charge under subsection (2), if the person charged did not know that the publication was seditious when it came into his possession, he did, as soon as the nature of the publication became known to him, deliver the publication to the nearest administrative officer or to the officer in charge of the nearest police station.
(4) A printing machine which has been, or is reasonably suspected of being, used for or in connection with the printing or reproduction of a seditious publication may be seized or otherwise secured by a police officer pending the trial and conviction or discharge or acquittal of any Person accused of printing or reproducing any seditious publication; and, when any person is convicted of printing or reproducing a seditious publication, the court may, in addition to any other penalty which it may impose, order that the printing machine on which the publication was printed or reproduced shall be either confiscated for a period not exceeding twelve months, or forfeited to the Republic, and may make such order whether or not the person convicted is, or was at the time when the publication was printed or reproduced, the owner of the printing machine.
(5) A printing machine forfeited under subsection (4) shall be sold, and the proceeds less expenses shall be paid into the Treasury.
(6) When the proprietor, publisher, printer or editor of a newspaper is convicted of printing or publishing a seditious publication in a newspaper, the court may, in addition to any other penalty it may impose, and whether or not it has made any order under subsection
(4) make an order prohibiting any further publication of the newspaper for a period not exceeding twelve months.
(7) The court may, at any time, on the application of the Attorney. General and on taking such security, if any, for good behaviour as the court may see fit to order, revoke any order madeby it for forfeiting or confiscating a printing machine or prohibiting further publication of a newspaper.
(8) A court before ordering the forfeiture or confiscation of a printing machine under this section shall be satisfied that the printing
machine was the printing machine upon which the seditious publication was printed or reproduced.
(9) In any case in which a printing machine has been secured or confiscated under this section, the Inspector-General of Police may, in his discretion, cause-
(a) the printing machine or any part of it to be removed; or
(b) any part of the machine to be sealed so as to prevent its use: Provided that the owner of the printing machine or his agents shall be entitled to reasonable access to it to keep it in working order.
(10) The Inspector-General of Police or any police officer in pursuance of the powers conferred by this section shall not be liable for any damage caused to a printing machine, whether by neglect or otherwise, not being damage willfully caused to the machine
(11) Any person who uses or attempts to use a printing machine secured or confiscated under subsection (4) shall be guilty of an offence and shall be liable upon conviction to a fine not exceeding fifteen thousand shillings or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding three years or to both such fine and imprisonment,
(12) Any Person who prints or publishes a newspaper in contravention of an order made under subsection (6) shall be guilty of an offence and shall be liable upon conviction to a fine not exceeding fifteen thousand shillings or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding three years or to both such fine and imprisonment.
(13) In this section the expression ''Printing machine'' includes a Printing Press, Copying press, type-setting machine, photographic, dublicating or engraving apparatus, or other machine or apparatus used for or in connection with printing or reproducing publications, and the type, appurtenances and equipment thereof.
33.-(1) No prosecution for an offence under section 32 shall be begun except within six months after the offence was committed:
Provided that where a person-
(a) commits such an offence from outside the United Republic; or
(b) leaves Tanganyika within a period of six months after committing such an offence, the prosecution for such an offence shall be begun within six months from the date when such person first arrives in, or returns to, the United Republic after-
(i) committing such an offence; or
(ii) leaving Tanganyika, as the case may be.
(2) A person shall not be prosecuted for an offence under section 32 without the written consent of the Director of Public Prosecutions.
34. No person shall be convicted of an offence under section 32 on the uncorroborated testimony of one witness.
35. In the case of any of the offences defined in this Part. when the manifestation by an overt act of the intention to effect any purpose is an element of the offence, every act of conspiring with any person to effect that purpose, and every act done in furtherance of the purpose by any of the persons conspiring, is deemed to be an overt act manifesting the intention.
36.-(1) Any person who publishes any false statement, rumour or report which is likely to cause fear and alarm to the public or to disturb the public peace shall be guilty of an offence and shall be
liable upon conviction to a fine not exceeding fifteen thousand shillings
Or to imprisonment or a term not exceeding three years or to both
such fine and imprisonment.
Publication
of false
news likely
to cause
fear
and alarm to
the public
(2) It shall be a defence to a charge under subsection (1) if the
accused proves that, prior to publication, be took such measures to
verify the accuracy of such statement, rumour or report as to lead him
reasonably to believe that it was true.
37.-(1) Any person who, without lawful excuse, prints, published
or to any assembly makes any statement indicating or implying that it
would be incumbent or desirable to do without lawful authority any
act calculated to-
Incitement
to violence
No. 3 Newspapers 1976 19
(a) bring death or physical injury to any person or to any category
or community of persons; or
(b) lead to destruction or damage of any property,
shall be guilty of an offence and shall be liable upon conviction to a
fine not exceeding fifteen thousand shillings or to imprisonment for a
term not exceeding three years or to both such fine and imprisonment.
(2) For the purposes of this section ''an assembly" means a gathering
of three or more persons.
(3) A person shall not be prosecuted for an offence tinder this
section without the written consent of the Director of Public Prosecutions.
Click to expand...


ambayo ilisainiwa na Nyerere
 
Mwita Maranya said:
Sitarajii serikali hii ya ccm na kwa sasa hii ya Kikwete kupeleka bungeni muswada wa marekebisho ya sheria hii namba 3 ya mwaka 1976.

Je, haiwezekani kwa mbunge mmoja kupeleka bungeni hoja binafsi ya kuifanyia marekebisho sheria hiyo kama sio kufutwa kabisa? Hili bunge la sasa limejaa wanasheria, hakuna hata mmoja aliyewahi kufikiria jambo hili?
Tangu tume ya Nyalali ilipoiainisha sheria hii kuwa miongoni mwa sheria 40 zinazotakiwa kufutwa ama kufanyiwa marekebisho, hajawahi kutokea mbunge yeyote kupeleka hoja binafsi kutaka marekebisho ya hii sheria? hata mbunge mwanahabri kitaaluma, hakuna anayeweza kujaribu kutukwamua katika hili?
Click to expand...
I wish I could've put it that way!

It's been long overdue!!
 
Hivi kuna mtu ambaye alikuwa hajui hili litatokea? Niliandika na kusema na kujaribu kuwaamsha watu waelewe hatari inayokuja watu walidhani "was just crying wolf". Baada ya uchaguzi wa 2010 uamuzi ulichkuliwa mapema sana kunyamazisha nguvu ya vyombo vya habari kwani ilijulikana kabisa kuwa havikutoa ushirikiano wa kutosha (kama 2005) na hivyo kumgharimu JK kura zake na CCM kupoteza. Ilishaamriwa kuwa hatuwezi kwenda kwenye 2015 chini ya vyombo vya habari vikiwa huru hivyo.

JF itahusishwa pia na labda hata sisi wengine kutakiwa kuwa extradited back home. Kama tunaamini tunatetea dhamira zetu na kuwa tuko sahihi katika maoni yetu ni lazima tuwe tayari kwa matokeo yake.

Ikumbukwe hawahitaji sheria ya magazeti kumshtaki mtu yeyote. KUna Sheria ya Ulinzi na pia Sheria ya Polisi ambazo zote zinaweza kutumiwa kufikia matokeo yale yale. Haitoshi kubadili Sheria ya Magazeti - mnajaribu kumwambia nyani abadili sheria inayomlinda kula mahindi shambani! huyo ndani atakayebadili sheria hiyo atakuwa ameokoka!
 
Bajabiri said:
Hahahahah
nshawapa wapangaj wenzangu
Click to expand...

Kwa mtaji huo, utakuwa umeshiriki ukombozi wa nchi yako kwa kiasi kikubwa zaidi ya unavyodhani!!

Fanya kweli na usitanie...Ningekuwa karibu yako ningekusaidia kutoa photocopy!!
 
Mwita Maranya said:
Sitarajii serikali hii ya ccm na kwa sasa hii ya Kikwete kupeleka bungeni muswada wa marekebisho ya sheria hii namba 3 ya mwaka 1976.

Je, haiwezekani kwa mbunge mmoja kupeleka bungeni hoja binafsi ya kuifanyia marekebisho sheria hiyo kama sio kufutwa kabisa? Hili bunge la sasa limejaa wanasheria, hakuna hata mmoja aliyewahi kufikiria jambo hili?
Tangu tume ya Nyalali ilipoiainisha sheria hii kuwa miongoni mwa sheria 40 zinazotakiwa kufutwa ama kufanyiwa marekebisho, hajawahi kutokea mbunge yeyote kupeleka hoja binafsi kutaka marekebisho ya hii sheria? hata mbunge mwanahabri kitaaluma, hakuna anayeweza kujaribu kutukwamua katika hili?
Click to expand...

Kweli mkuu,

Hebu ongea na wapambanaji hapo HQ uone wanasemaje??

Naamini kazi ya posho tumeifikisha mahali pazuri..Tunawaza kuanza na hii ambayo wao ndio wanaishadadia ili tuwaoneshe kazi!!

Hata hivyo, tukumbuke kuwa bunge lina vilaza wengi na watasumbua sana!!

Ila ni bora kulianzisha!
 
Gagnija said:
Pasco,
Katiba inatoa haki ya upashanaji habari. Hivi hamuwezi kutumia taaluma zenu za sheria kuhoji mahakamani uhalali wa sheria hii inayotunyima haki yetu ya kikatiba?
Click to expand...

kuna mwandishi ana muda huo?? kwa huyu jamaa wa mwananchi nitamtetea ,mwananchi kiko well balanced na hakijanunuliwa na mtu

wengine akina Kibanda wacha waumie kwani JK na Lowassa wako vitani!
 
Gagnija said:
Pasco,
Katiba inatoa haki ya upashanaji habari. Hivi hamuwezi kutumia taaluma zenu za sheria kuhoji mahakamani uhalali wa sheria hii inayotunyima haki yetu ya kikatiba?
Click to expand...
Tatizo kubwa ni wanahabari wetu,hii sheria ipo muda mrefu lakini hawakuisemea sana,waliipuuza! Wanahabari hawana umoja wa dhati wa kujitoa,hata hii movement tunayoiona hapa ni juhudi binafsi za Pasco lakini bila Pasco kupata sapoti ya kutosha kuipinga sheria hii hatofanikiwa(kumbuka kwa wamiliki wa vyombo vya habari,habari kama hìi haiuzi).hatuna wanahabari wa kujitoa haswa na hata waliopo wanajitoa lakini hawadumu pumzi inakwisha kwasababu ya uchache wao unaofanya washughulikiwe kirahisi kama ndugu yetu Pasco wa JF! Namuombea na Mkuu Max asiishiwe pumzi mapema maana ndio only Survival ambaye target tu haijamlenga ili wamlipue! Tutafika kwa uwezo wa Mola!
 
Kidatu said:
Pasco,

Sheria hutungwa, huvunjwa na husimamiwa na watu. Na kama kawaida ilivyo, kila binadamu ana ukomo wa uvumilivu kwenye kila jambo, huenda ukomo huo umefika mwisho kwa sasa.

Sheria husika ilikuwepo na ilikuwa inatumika haswa katika kipindi cha awamu ya kwanza ya utawala hapa nchini. Masharti yakalegezwa kidogo na uhuru wa habari ukawepo kwa level fulani, bila shaka uhuru huo umezidi mipaka yake na sasa ni wakati muafaka wa kurudisha mambo yawe kama yanavyopaswa kuwa.
Click to expand...

Mkuu nakuheshimu..! Pia nadhani utakuwa na level fulani ya taaluma (hata kama si ya uandishi wa habari). Sasa naomba nikuulize kwa kile nilicho-highlight red hapo juu:
  1. Umesema bila shaka uhuru huo umezidi mipaka bila ku-cite ni wapi au kipengere kipi katika makala Mwigamba alivuka mipaka na mpaka ni upi. Ufafanuzi tafadhali..?
  2. Ni wakati muafaka wa kurudisha mambo yawe kama yanavyopaswa kuwa au kama yalivyokuwa..? Maana kama ndivyo yanavyopaswa kuwa basi nchi hii iko hatarini kubaki vipande vipande. Uhuru wa kutoa/kupokea maoni unaingiliwa, we Mtanzania mwenzetu unachekelea?
Huu ni wakati wa kila Mtanzania kusimama imara kupinga huu unyanyasaji. Maana hata katiba mpya itaandikwa kwa maoni kama ya Mwigamba, sasa kama tayari tunaanza kutishwa namna hii kweli kuna katiba mpya hapo..?

Take: Tuionee huruma nchi yetu Tanzania..!
 
Dark City said:
Hata mimi nilikuwa na wazo kama hilo... Kama katiba inatoa uhuru wa maoni halafu kukawa na sheria ya hovyo inayozuia, kwani hiyo sheria inakuwa na nguvu tena?

Katika mazingira kama haya...watu hawawezi kwenda mahaka kuu kuzuia hii kesi ili kwanza hili suala litolewa uamuzi kama sheria inaweza kuikalia katiba??
Click to expand...
Dark City hii ni moja ya sheria 40 za ukandamizaji ambazo zilipaswa kufutwa tangu zamani. Kwa vile ilikuwepo na haikutumika, tasnia ya habari ikabweteka kwa kujiaminisha kuwa haitatumika sasa serikali imeikumbuka inaitumia ndio sasa waandishi tunaamka tunaona tunaonewa!.

Hii kesi itakuwa ndio landmark case ya kuhakikisha this time inakuwa scrapped off from the books of laws!.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar Discussions

Back
Top Bottom
Forums
New posts
Post thread
Back