Mpasuko CCM: Watofautiana juu ya Serikali mbili

[makubazi]

Naona sasa wakti umefika wa kila upandi achukuwe ubao wake maana choko choko hizo hazijanza jana wala juzi toka mwenye yupo hai yaani karume toka hapo mpaka laana ya leo bado tuu na huu siyo muungano ni kama koloni la tanganyeka na huu ni mwaka wa hamsini hakuna hata ka nchi kamoja au kisiwa kadogo ambao wamependa au wanania ya kujiunga na huwo muungana hakuna hawa hawa tuu na ulofa uko hapo hapo lakini kwa viongozi wana shindana kwa matumbo na lewe na lewalo 1 1 1 ni 3

 

[agondika]

Hiyo zuga tu wafanye walivyotumwa

 

[Averoes]

Je wazanzibari wako tayari kubadili katiba yao?Naamini hawa waliosema serikali tatu wana akili sana.Kwanza walitaka kuficha aibu ya Rais aliyeruhusu kuvunjwa kwa katiba ya JMT.Pili waliona jinsi wazanzibari walivyokuwa na msimamo mkali dhidi ya muungano huu na kama utakumbuka ile rasimu ya sheria ya kwanza ya mabadiliko ya katiba ilikataza kujadiliwa kwa suala la muungano lakini waliichana chana hadharani licha ya kwamba tayari wazanzibari walikwisha jipa mamlaka ya nchi kamili kinyume na katiba ya JMT.Tatu hofu ya kuvunjika muunngano wa serikali 3 ni ya kufikirika na hivyo haina mashiko kwani hata sasa kwenye serikali mbili tayari wazanzibari wamesha vunja na sasa wao wanajitambulisha kama wazenji na sio waTZ

Sent from my BlackBerry 9220 using JamiiForums

kibaravumba,

Kwanza Zanzibar, haijavunja katiba ya JMT sababu ya marekebisho yale ya 2010 ya katiba ya Zanzibar ya 1984.

Pili Katiba ya Zanzibar is not subservient to Katiba ya JMT.

Uzuri kuwa munaufaham msimamo wa wananchi wa Zanzibar na sio viongozi wahafidhina vibaraka vya CCM vya Zanzibar.

Wa Tanganyika mshukuru kuwa wazanzibari ndio waliowaamsha kutoka katika giza nene na rogo la mbio za Mwenge kudumisha fikira za Mwenyekiti alieko kuzimu!

Zanzibar Kwanza, Tanganyika Kwanza shengesha baadae! Amaanda!!:thumbup:

 

[Kakke]

[h=1][/h]Written by Wamtambwe // 19/02/2014 // Habari // 9 Comments

Dodoma. Baadhi ya wabunge wa CCM ambao ni wajumbe wa Bunge Maalumu la Katiba, wamepinga msimamo wa chama hicho unaowataka kutetea muundo wa Serikali mbili katika mijadala ya Bunge hilo.

Wakizungumza kwa nyakati tofauti katika viwanja vya Bunge mjini Dodoma, wamesema hawaoni mantiki ya msimamo huo, kwa kuwa Katiba inayotengenezwa ni ya wananchi.

Habari kutoka katika kikao cha ndani cha CCM kilichofanyika juzi kati ya Mwenyekiti wa CCM, Rais Jakaya na wabunge wa CCM, baadhi ya wabunge waliweka wazi msimamo wao wa kutaka Serikali tatu.

“Wapo wengi hawakubaliani na msimamo wa CCM wa kutaka watetee Serikali mbili na wanashikilia msimamo wa Serikali tatu, ambao ndiyo msimamo wa wananchi wao,” alisema mmoja wa wabunge aliyekaririwa kutoka katika kikao hicho.

Habari zilizovuja kutoka katika kikao hicho, miongoni mwa walioeleza msomamo huo ni Alphaxard Kangi Lugola wa Mwibara, ni miongoni mwa waliokuwa na msimamo mkali kuhusu jambo hilo.

Lugola alipohojiwa jana, alishikilia msimamo wake wa kutaka Serikali tatu akisema anafanya hivyo ili kulinda masilahi ya wananchi anaowawakilisha.

“Mimi kama Kangi Lugola kama mjumbe ninayesimamia walionituma, nataka Serikali tatu… Hapa kuna mambo mawili, msimamo wa chama na msimamo wa mimi kama mwakilishi,” alisema.

Lugola aliongeza, “Msimamo huu nitautoa pia kwenye Bunge la Katiba na nitajenga hoja halafu Bunge kama chombo kitaweka mizania, ni muundo upi wa Serikali upite.”

Inadaiwa Christopher Ole Sendeka wa Simanjiro alikwenda mbali zaidi na kumweleza Rais Kikwete kwamba hakuna dhambi kubwa aliyotenda kama kuruhusu Zanzibar kuvunja Katiba ya Jamhuri ya Muungano.

Kwa mujibu wa habari hizo, Sendeka alisema matatizo yote yanayoibuka sasa kuhusu muundo wa Serikali, yanatokana na marekebisho ya Katiba ya Zanzibar ambayo yalivunja Katiba ya Jamhuri ya Muungano wa Tanzania.

Marekebisho ya Katiba ya Zanzibar ya mwaka 2010 ndiyo yaliyosababisha Zanzibar kutambuliwa kama nchi ndani ya Jamhuri ya Muungano wa Tanzania na kuruhusu Rais wa Zanzibar kuwa na uwezo wa kuigawa mipaka ya Zanzibar, jukumu ambalo ni la Rais wa Muungano.

Alipoulizwa kuhusu madai hayo jana, Sendeka, alikataa kueleza lolote akisema kikao hicho kilikuwa ni cha faragha.
Mbunge mmoja kutoka Kanda ya Ziwa ambaye hata hivyo hakutaka jina lake litajwe, aliliambia gazeti hili kuwa kwa uchache, theluthi mbili ya wabunge wa CCM wanataka Serikali tatu.

“Subirini muone moto utakaowaka bungeni siku tutakapofika kwenye hicho kipengele cha Muungano, nadhani halitatosha, tumeamua kusimama na wananchi siyo msimamo wa CCM,” alidokeza.

Mjumbe huyo alisema yeye ataeleza wazi kuwa haungi mkono muundo wa Serikali ya CCM unaotaka Serikali mbili na kwamba yuko tayari kukabiliana na adhabu yoyote kama CCM itaona amefanya makosa.
Mbunge wa Beatrice Shelukindo wa Kilindi ambaye pia ni mjumbe wa Bunge hilo, alisema awali alikuwa muumini wa Serikali tatu lakini baada ya kuelimishwa, amebadili msimamo huo.

“Ni kweli wapo wana CCM wanataka Serikali tatu, hata mimi nilikuwa huko lakini baada ya kuelimishwa nakubali muundo wa Serikali mbili pale tu kero za Muungano zitakapotatuliwa,” alisema.
Alitoa mfano wa mbunge kutoka Zanzibar kuwekwa katika Kamati ya Kudumu y
a Bunge ya Serikali za Mitaa (LAAC) wakati mambo yanayofanywa na kamati hiyo kwa asilimia 100 yanahusu upande wa Bara pekee.
Mbunge mwingine kutoka Kanda ya Ziwa ambaye naye aliomba jina lake lihifadhiwe, alisema ni usaliti kwa CCM kuwachagulia Watanzania aina ya Muungano baada ya kutoa maoni yao kuhusu jambo hilo.

“Mimi binafsi nataka Serikali mbili lakini siungi mkono kitendo cha chama changu kuweka msimamo wa pamoja na kutaka uwe ndiyo msimamo wa taifa kwani Katiba ni mali ya wananchi,” alisema na kuongeza:

Mgawanyiko huo wa wajumbe wa Bunge Maalumu la Katiba, umekuja siku moja baada ya CCM kupitia kwa Katibu wa Itikadi na Uenezi wa CCM, Nape Nnauye kutangaza msimamo wa CCM kama taasisi kuwa ni muundo wa Serikali mbili na imewataka wajumbe wake kusimamia msimamo huo wakati wa mijadala bungeni.

Hata hivyo, Zainab Kawawa alitaka wajumbe wa Bunge la Katiba watakaokwenda kinyume na msimamo wa chama, wanyang’anywe kadi

source : mwananchi.co.tz Reply With Quote .

 

[Salas]

Mwanzo wa mwisho wa Babel mkuu uwaja asema Bwana!

 

[Geeky]

Tatizo sio chama hapo, tatizo ni hao wanachama on this instance. Hakuna chama kisichokuwa na misimamo duniani, na ukienda kwenye liberal democracies whereby votes are largely bought by firm part party lines between left and right. Hapo zikija sera ambazo zimekaa ki-conservative kuna baadhi ya wabunge hawato kubaliana nazo (either morally or due to self beliefs), same applies to other parties with strong view-points.

Hata vyama vyenye mlengo wa socialism vinabishana (how far to intervene) hivyo si wanachama wote wanakubaliana. Hizo ndio sababu vyama vya siasa vinaweka whips to make sure those at the top and representing people through their parties are always in toe with major party lines.

Mara chache sana utasikia wabunge wakitoa kauli tofauti na viongozi wao nadhani kwanza wanatakiwa kuandika barua na wapate baraka za juu kabla ya kutofautiana na sera za chama vilevile mfano kama UK kabla ya kupoteza kura ya chama bungeni lazima upate mmbunge wa upinzani mwenye msimamo na serikali hili usipige kura, vinginevyo ukipoteza kura ya chama kijinga sidhani kama watakuacha hivihivi wanawaita 'rebels' viongozi wa namna hiyo.

Ndio maana nakwambia hawa jamaa wamekosa nidhamu.

Again Happy Feet the issue at hand is how we get a new constitution with a concensus (and I hope the speaker elect will set that In motion) but even for us on the sidelines know for sure that CCM party is flawed on this to think that it can use 'a majority' to effect the outcome

1)61% of tzs are in favor of a federation, that's a blow!

2) plus the president insisting that this constitution will outlive most of us and indeed most parties : that no party should approach this issue with pre conceived determinations.
Yet CCM has officially said that it doesn't support the proposed system
and I think we know why == a federation has potentially a chance to further devide power between these governments and will pave way for further 'autonomies' both in znz and 'mainland tz' ( I can't imagine waunguja supporting a federation which means full autonomy for znz and the country going back to Pembans-- and unguja being a CCM base has CCM support as CCM too wouldn't wanna loose foothold there-- imagine the blow following such a dissolution of unguja) on the mainland I think it's fair to say that CCM were never prepared to have a full fledged bunge that has no znz seats(which has always strengthened it's stance).

but there's even a more subtle problem here, let's admit an autonomous mainland Tz is even harder to govern for CCM given its representation in the resulting bunge, also that parties will have to adjust to divide the new tanganyika cake, it will see it's role diminished as partner cuf stands no chance, and cdm is proving a formidable foe.

3)Given the moral obligation that CCM has: as the oldest and incumbent party it should now honor the opinions of the majority of Tanzanians and give us baby tanganyika and I know it's not the best thing to happen but it will solve a lot of issues.
'Not the best thing' as we know the Sudanese crisis is unraveling as US and China are struggling to take hegemony this could potentially happen in znz either by Iran or even Kenya taking Pemba. Yet I think we can live with it.

Conclusion
=========
My take is that if frankly, CCM was founded on Democratic principles or rather it was never an oligarchy to begin with it'd have nothing to fear or lose as a party no matter the outcome but as a party its worried sick of the ramifications of federated gov just because they can't imagine their position in it. On the other hand the opposition has nothing to lose but all to gain e.g CDM takes political credit for standing it's ground on the 'Katiba mpya' initiative seeing now that it's being realized it also sees division (of any kind in tz) as progressing it's policies as it will help realize it's dream of futher federating tanganyika which is on par with its manifesto.
Capiche?

 

[Eric Cartman]

the issue at hand is how we get a new constitution with a concensus (and I hope the speaker elect will set that In motion) but even for us on the sidelines know for sure that CCM party is flawed on this to think that it can use 'a majority' to effect the outcome

Geeky, your argument is a just reverberation of other members in this forum of whom are in support of that perspective. One common denominator among the proponents of three governments or a complete disintegration is their habit of denying the democratic values that exist, respecting enacted laws which legitimized the union and CCM's valid rights to air their views. Some have gone as far as to suggesting their political instincts carry legitimate claims and we should debate on those, I don't how rationale we were was supposed to be in the end.

You can not propose such changes without the will of the people, since the process and the proposal escaped the path of popular vote; people have the right the to be represented indirectly, if the new constitution is to meet the democratic necessity and rights associated with subjects from the new laws that are going to govern them.

Others, in similar threads of the same topic had based their arguments by referring to previous situation where a constitution was enacted or law passed without the engagement of the people in an attempt to legitimize Judge Warioba radical proposals, whilst victimizing CCM stance and their upper hand. Such angles tend to ignore the first-principles and the case for it: arguments includes the amount of scholars we had at the time, the need for a quick legitimate contract between the people and their government, to why in the end it was right we adopted the one which had evolved for centuries with bearings of modern accepted values and democratic norms.

The same logic applied to the first union constitution, the premise for needing one was set for a quick and not needing the blessings of the people, the rationale here is the fact that Zanzibar a one state party at the time and Tanganyika on similar situation with TANU had made an agreement (this is why they say a one state party deprives democracy, nevertheless that was the situation and the two parties chose so, making their agreement legal under the first-principle).

Today the two parties are joined as one therefore not only they share the same political and policy stance but party ideological views as well in both shores. Hence since the constitution assembly consists of members of parliaments from both sides of the union, any party with the majority (remember the majority could have been the results of joint party voting position) however CCM's vote bears the mandate of the people under the current existing pluralism of party politics, it could have been any party but the electorate chose CCM to form the government on both sides.

Therefore what argument do people have in denying those fact? Large number in CCM which forms the government on both sides of the union means they carry the 'tacit consent' of the people (because they elected them) based on the rules of political engagement and the mandate to govern and thus far the same people have yet to demand the new constitution. If you ask me all this got this far because CCM listens even to the concerns of the minority the whole process should never have happened in the first place.

and I think we know why == a federation has potentially a chance to further devide power between these governments and will pave way for further 'autonomies' both in znz and 'mainland tz' ( I can't imagine waunguja supporting a federation which means full autonomy for znz and the country going back to Pembans-- and unguja being a CCM base has CCM support as CCM too wouldn't wanna loose foothold there

This is just your opinion I don't see any 'logical necessity' in order for me to agree or disagree, what we know CCM forms the government if there was any other party forming the government it would have been the base of the logical primitive that could have led to such a debate of your argument.

What I can't deny is the fact that there are politicians who have opened the 'pandora box' for the union to be discussed and have some support from the people, regardless of those facts a compatibilist would argue that, the situation is not supported by the path to see those changes. That is the election outcome for me and you, meaning CCM view point have the support of the people even in those parts thus far (if we have to look at facts)

but there's even a more subtle problem here, let's admit an autonomous mainland Tz is even harder to govern for CCM given its representation in the resulting bunge, also that parties will have to adjust to divide the new tanganyika cake, it will see it's role diminished as partner cuf stands no chance, and cdm is proving a formidable foe

For that to happen CCM on both sides have to differ in their opinions first regarding the union, until now both elected member and their senior cadres sit together in their NEC meetings, plan together and execute together, what makes you think that would change anytime sooner?

Given the moral obligation that CCM has: as the oldest and incumbent party it should now honor the opinions of the majority of Tanzanians and give us baby tanganyika and I know it's not the best thing to happen but it will solve a lot of issues

The only moral binding obligation CCM has, it is over its voters some of whom voted because of loyalty to the party, some because they trusted them in handling the union matters and some just thought they have good over all policies compared to other parties in the market.

Since we ignored the popular vote in deciding about the union, the democratic rights reside to the parliament where there are representative of the people a party with majority reps normally wins, thats how the cookies crumbles in politics. The rest are just your feeling come to think of it, most of your arguments are just those.

'Not the best thing' as we know the Sudanese crisis is unraveling as US and China are struggling to take hegemony this could potentially happen in znz either by Iran or even Kenya taking Pemba. Yet I think we can live with it.

I don't know what to say about this to be honest Iran or Kenya taking Pemba and why are they demanding for independence again?

My take is that if frankly, CCM was founded on Democratic principles or rather it was never an oligarchy to begin with it'd have nothing to fear or lose as a party no matter the outcome but as a party its worried sick of the ramifications of federated gov just because they can't imagine their position in it

I do agree with you on the foundation of CCM and earlier dominance, but remember we are now a multi party state. The position CCM finds itself in, is because the opposition is weak and not yet ready to be trusted. I wouldn't want such people to handle sensitive matters that could endanger our nation at the moment.

 

[Consigliere]

Dar na Tanga hazipo, ni Bagamoyo na Mombasa zilizokuwa chini ya SULTANI

kwani kuwa chini ya sultan ndiyo kuwa Zanzibar?
mbona hâta sultan alikuwa chini ya muingereza! Ndiyo kusema Common wealth countries zore zitakuwa nchi moja? Una maana kuwa huko tuendako idadi ya nchi itabaki sawa na idadi ya wakoloni waliotutawala?

 

[Consigliere]

Huko sasa ndio kukosa nidhamu, walichaguliwa kupitia chama gani leo waweze kuwa tofauti na msimamo wa chama kilichowasimamisha kuwawakilisha hao wananchi, halafu hayo madai yao wamehitimisha vipi wakati nina uhakika hakuna hata mmbunge mmoja kati yao aliyewahi kufanya kikao jimboni mwake hili haweze hata kutetea huo msimamo wa wananchi.

inawezekana chama ndiyo kimekosa nudgalu na kuwasalitu wananchi wake kwa kutoa misimamo inatitifautiana na wananchi na wanachala Wao.

 

[Eric Cartman]

inawezekana chama ndiyo kimekosa nudgalu na kuwasalitu wananchi wake kwa kutoa misimamo inatitifautiana na wananchi na wanachala Wao.

there as never been an interesting psychological debate to tempt me thus far that is my favorite subject (i know they got the anxiety party, i am working on it shyt happened), mwambie Dr.Katila aianzishe siku moja. azubui ndema, me out (I hide my low reasoning abilities and my insecurities in the joy of ridiculing others).

 

[MWALLA]

ccm wako right kuhusiana na msimamo wao wa kuwa na serikali 2 tu. Binafsi naunga mkono serikali 2 lkn kwa mtazamo tofauti na wa ccm. Nikiutazama msimamo wa ccm kutaka serikali mbili napata picha kamili kuwa sasa ndio tunaelekea kule kwenye kuvunja muungano uliopo maana ukitazama msimamo huu ni kwamba serikali 2 maana yake ni kuwepo na serikali ya tanganyika na serikali ya zanzibar. Huu ndio msimamo wa ccm ukielekea kwenye kuuvunja muungano uliopo. Kwa hili mimi naunga mkono 100% tusibaki na serikali 2 kama tulivyo sasa bali tuwe na serikali 2 ya tanganyika na zanzibar. Muungano kwaheriiiiiii:

 

[MWALLA]

kibaravumba,

Kwanza Zanzibar, haijavunja katiba ya JMT sababu ya marekebisho yale ya 2010 ya katiba ya Zanzibar ya 1984.

Pili Katiba ya Zanzibar is not subservient to Katiba ya JMT.

Uzuri kuwa munaufaham msimamo wa wananchi wa Zanzibar na sio viongozi wahafidhina vibaraka vya CCM vya Zanzibar.

Wa Tanganyika mshukuru kuwa wazanzibari ndio waliowaamsha kutoka katika giza nene na rogo la mbio za Mwenge kudumisha fikira za Mwenyekiti alieko kuzimu!

Zanzibar Kwanza, Tanganyika Kwanza shengesha baadae! Amaanda!!:thumbup:

ccm wako right kuhusiana na msimamo wao wa kuwa na serikali 2 tu. Binafsi naunga mkono serikali 2 lkn kwa mtazamo tofauti na wa ccm. Nikiutazama msimamo wa ccm kutaka serikali mbili napata picha kamili kuwa sasa ndio tunaelekea kule kwenye kuvunja muungano uliopo maana ukitazama msimamo huu ni kwamba serikali 2 maana yake ni kuwepo na serikali ya tanganyika na serikali ya zanzibar. Huu ndio msimamo wa ccm ukielekea kwenye kuuvunja muungano uliopo. Kwa hili mimi naunga mkono 100% tusibaki na serikali 2 kama tulivyo sasa bali tuwe na serikali 2 ya tanganyika na zanzibar. Muungano kwaheriiiiiii:

 

[MWALLA]

Mimi binafsi nilipenda tuwe na serikali moja lakini Zanzibar tayari wamerekebisha Katiba yao na kujitangazia kuwa Nchi yenye serikali yake, rais wake na mamlaka yake, sasa inakuwaje Tanganyika isiwepo pia?

ccm wako right kuhusiana na msimamo wao wa kuwa na serikali 2 tu. Binafsi naunga mkono serikali 2 lkn kwa mtazamo tofauti na wa ccm. Nikiutazama msimamo wa ccm kutaka serikali mbili napata picha kamili kuwa sasa ndio tunaelekea kule kwenye kuvunja muungano uliopo maana ukitazama msimamo huu ni kwamba serikali 2 maana yake ni kuwepo na serikali ya tanganyika na serikali ya zanzibar. Huu ndio msimamo wa ccm ukielekea kwenye kuuvunja muungano uliopo. Kwa hili mimi naunga mkono 100% tusibaki na serikali 2 kama tulivyo sasa bali tuwe na serikali 2 ya tanganyika na zanzibar. Muungano kwaheriiiiiii:

 

[Msingida]

Sisi wa serikali moja mbona tunakosa uwakilishi?
Wabunge wasikubali kuburuzwa na Viongozi wa vyama vyao.Wa wakilishe maoni ya wapiga kura wao na si chama.
Serikali mbili ilisha shindwa siki nyingi.iliyobaki ni mmoja au tatu.

 

[NYAMISANA]

siyo swala la mbunge mkuu, CCM wana wasomi wazuri sana, wanajua athari za serikali tatu kama ambavyo makundi mengine wakiwemo wanazuoni wanaungana na CCM kuilaani hoja ya serikali tatu kwa vile haina mashiko katika mstakabali wa umoja, undugu ulioasisiwa na viongozi watangulizi wa taifa hili teule la Mungu. Inawezekana kabisa Mwandishi wa habari aliwahoji wana-CCM wafu kama akina MBOWE na weingine waliokumbatia kadi za CCM huku wakiwa upinzani.

Wakati unachangia ungejaribu pia kuangalia usaliti wa katiba ya Zanzibar dhidi ya muungano na udugu unaousema. Pia ungesema ufu alionao Kangi Lugola na Ole Sendeka. Tueleze pia kama wewe una kaeneo pale Zanzibar. Sasa huo udugu ulioasisiwa na hao baba zetu kama uliruhusu CHANGU NI CHANGU CHAKO NI CHETU ni wakati muafaka wa kuona kama walikuwa sahihi au la. Tukiendelea kuwa na ubongo uliovilia damu, tutakuwa tunajisliti wenyewe. MUUNGANO HUU SI MSAAFU tunaweza tukabadili mfumo wa muungano.

 

[masopakyindi]

Dodoma. Baadhi ya wabunge wa CCM ambao ni wajumbe wa Bunge Maalumu la Katiba, wamepinga msimamo wa chama hicho unaowataka kutetea muundo wa Serikali mbili katika mijadala ya Bunge hilo.

Wakizungumza kwa nyakati tofauti katika viwanja vya Bunge mjini Dodoma, wamesema hawaoni mantiki ya msimamo huo, kwa kuwa Katiba inayotengenezwa ni ya wananchi.

Habari kutoka katika kikao cha ndani cha CCM kilichofanyika juzi kati ya Mwenyekiti wa CCM, Rais Jakaya na wabunge wa CCM, baadhi ya wabunge waliweka wazi msimamo wao wa kutaka Serikali tatu.

“Wapo wengi hawakubaliani na msimamo wa CCM wa kutaka watetee Serikali mbili na wanashikilia msimamo wa Serikali tatu, ambao ndiyo msimamo wa wananchi wao,” alisema mmoja wa wabunge aliyekaririwa kutoka katika kikao hicho.

Habari zilizovuja kutoka katika kikao hicho, miongoni mwa walioeleza msomamo huo ni Alphaxard Kangi Lugola wa Mwibara, ni miongoni mwa waliokuwa na msimamo mkali kuhusu jambo hilo.

Lugola alipohojiwa jana, alishikilia msimamo wake wa kutaka Serikali tatu akisema anafanya hivyo ili kulinda masilahi ya wananchi anaowawakilisha.

“Mimi kama Kangi Lugola kama mjumbe ninayesimamia walionituma, nataka Serikali tatu… Hapa kuna mambo mawili, msimamo wa chama na msimamo wa mimi kama mwakilishi,” alisema.

Lugola aliongeza, “Msimamo huu nitautoa pia kwenye Bunge la Katiba na nitajenga hoja halafu Bunge kama chombo kitaweka mizania, ni muundo upi wa Serikali upite.”

Inadaiwa Christopher Ole Sendeka wa Simanjiro alikwenda mbali zaidi na kumweleza Rais Kikwete kwamba hakuna dhambi kubwa aliyotenda kama kuruhusu Zanzibar kuvunja Katiba ya Jamhuri ya Muungano.

Kwa mujibu wa habari hizo, Sendeka alisema matatizo yote yanayoibuka sasa kuhusu muundo wa Serikali, yanatokana na marekebisho ya Katiba ya Zanzibar ambayo yalivunja Katiba ya Jamhuri ya Muungano wa Tanzania.

Marekebisho ya Katiba ya Zanzibar ya mwaka 2010 ndiyo yaliyosababisha Zanzibar kutambuliwa kama nchi ndani ya Jamhuri ya Muungano wa Tanzania na kuruhusu Rais wa Zanzibar kuwa na uwezo wa kuigawa mipaka ya Zanzibar, jukumu ambalo ni la Rais wa Muungano.

Alipoulizwa kuhusu madai hayo jana, Sendeka, alikataa kueleza lolote akisema kikao hicho kilikuwa ni cha faragha.

Mbunge mmoja kutoka Kanda ya Ziwa ambaye hata hivyo hakutaka jina lake litajwe, aliliambia gazeti hili kuwa kwa uchache, theluthi mbili ya wabunge wa CCM wanataka Serikali tatu.

“Subirini muone moto utakaowaka bungeni siku tutakapofika kwenye hicho kipengele cha Muungano, nadhani halitatosha, tumeamua kusimama na wananchi siyo msimamo wa CCM,” alidokeza.

Mjumbe huyo alisema yeye ataeleza wazi kuwa haungi mkono muundo wa Serikali ya CCM unaotaka Serikali mbili na kwamba yuko tayari kukabiliana na adhabu yoyote kama CCM itaona amefanya makosa.

Mbunge wa Beatrice Shelukindo wa Kilindi ambaye pia ni mjumbe wa Bunge hilo, alisema awali alikuwa muumini wa Serikali tatu lakini baada ya kuelimishwa, amebadili msimamo huo.

“Ni kweli wapo wana CCM wanataka Serikali tatu, hata mimi nilikuwa huko lakini baada ya kuelimishwa nakubali muundo wa Serikali mbili pale tu kero za Muungano zitakapotatuliwa,” alisema.

Alitoa mfano wa mbunge kutoka Zanzibar kuwekwa katika Kamati ya Kudumu ya Bunge ya Serikali za Mitaa (LAAC) wakati mambo yanayofanywa na kamati hiyo kwa asilimia 100 yanahusu upande wa Bara pekee.

Mbunge mwingine kutoka Kanda ya Ziwa ambaye naye aliomba jina lake lihifadhiwe, alisema ni usaliti kwa CCM kuwachagulia Watanzania aina ya Muungano baada ya kutoa maoni yao kuhusu jambo hilo.

“Mimi binafsi nataka Serikali mbili lakini siungi mkono kitendo cha chama changu kuweka msimamo wa pamoja na kutaka uwe ndiyo msimamo wa taifa kwani Katiba ni mali ya wananchi,” alisema na kuongeza:

Mgawanyiko huo wa wajumbe wa Bunge Maalumu la Katiba, umekuja siku moja baada ya CCM kupitia kwa Katibu wa Itikadi na Uenezi wa CCM, Nape Nnauye kutangaza msimamo wa CCM kama taasisi kuwa ni muundo wa Serikali mbili na imewataka wajumbe wake kusimamia msimamo huo wakati wa mijadala bungeni.

Hata hivyo, Zainab Kawawa alitaka wajumbe wa Bunge la Katiba watakaokwenda kinyume na msimamo wa chama, wanyang’anywe kadi

source : mwananchi.co.tz

The underlined , I rest my case!!
Kumbe bado tuna wawakilishi wanaotumia akili ndani ya CCM.
Hili la Zanzibar kuchokonoa Katiba na bado wakataka kubaki ndani ya Muungano matokeo yake tunayaona sasa.

 

[August]

chanzo ni uvunjifu wa katiba kwamba zanzibar ni nchi hivyo ndani ya muungano kuna nchi mbali ya zanzibar na ya muungano, badala ya serikali moja ndani ya muungano,hivyo kuikandamiza Tanzania bara au tanganyika.

 

[Geeky]

Happy Feet , your argument is a just reverberation of other members in this forum of whom are in support of that perspective. One common denominator among the proponents of three governments or a complete disintegration is their habit of denying the democratic values that exist, respecting enacted laws which legitimized the union and CCM’s valid rights to air their views. Some have gone as far as to suggesting their political instincts carry legitimate claims and we should debate on those, I don’t how rationale we were was supposed to be in the end.

No doubt CCM is too big a party to want it's views ignored by a majority of Tanzanians what bothers most of us is why the same gov should spend taxpayer's money on a referendum that they come to outright reject, and CCM now being as vocal about the results of this referendum as they were about the Nyalali commission some of us can't help but wonder what does that say about the party view with regards to people's view, the bottom line is that CCM wants legitimacy that's why they enacted the bill under pressure they weren't ready for the outcomes in the first place but that's the unvarnished truth they'll have to live with.

Happy Feet,
You can not propose such changes without the will of the people, since the process and the proposal escaped the path of popular vote; people have the right the to be represented indirectly, if the new constitution is to meet the democratic necessity and rights associated with subjects from the new laws that are going to govern them.

Happy Feet ,
Others, in similar threads of the same topic had based their arguments by referring to previous situation where a constitution was enacted or law passed without the engagement of the people in an attempt to legitimize Judge Warioba radical proposals, whilst victimizing CCM stance and their upper hand. Such angles tend to ignore the first-principles and the case for it: arguments includes the amount of scholars we had at the time, the need for a quick legitimate contract between the people and their government, to why in the end it was right we adopted the one which had evolved for centuries with bearings of modern accepted values and democratic norms.

What Warrioba stands for are the opinions of the majority of Tanzanians as expressed during the process, and rightly so as he is the chairman of that 'select' committee he has even gone far to make clear his personal views on the state and structure of the Union which he admitted are quite different from those of Tanzanians of which 61% are in favor of a federated tz. He was dismayed with CCM outright rejection of the outcomes. We should uphold 'Nguvu ya hoja na sio hoja ya Nguvu' now even as CCM always remind the rest of us and occasionally remix the two. Thanks to Warrioba the results weren't cooked as usual and that took CCM by surprise.
We live in a post Nyerere Era, no one man or a group of people can veto the rights of the majority of Tanzanians.
To say that CCM represent a majority of Tanzanians just because they won elections and therefore should engage us all in their commitments in such a vital matter as 'constitutional rebirth' is pupostrous, CCM is itself a group among many with its interests and Franky it's interest doesn't concern many of us who have no party affiliation and that's why we had the commission on the first place it's mission cannot be ignored . so CCM cannot use this to stiffle the debate at hand to base it on some party vision whilst the party as we know is itself in upheavals. So thanks, but no thanks!

Happy Feet,
The same logic applied to the first union constitution, the premise for needing one was set for a quick and not needing the blessings of the people, the rationale here is the fact that Zanzibar a one state party at the time and Tanganyika on similar situation with TANU had made an agreement (this is why they say a one state party deprives democracy, nevertheless that was the situation and the two parties chose so, making their agreement legal under the first-principle).

As I have said and iterated before it's under the current political climate the gov needs legitimacy to proceed and that comes with engaging the public or else why did it need to collect views whilst their's a house representatives. It's because this is a bipartisan issue an in a democracy it has to engage people directly first in gathering their views (which it has come to reject) but also passing the Constitution requires people's direct consent via voting this is a very costly process indeed but democracy has its price. So turning it's back on people just because their views aren't aligned with CCM vision will be a violation of the very basic principles of democracy they profess to uphold.

Happy Feet,
Today the two parties are joined as one therefore not only they share the same political and policy stance but party ideological views as well in both shores. Hence since the constitution assembly consists of members of parliaments from both sides of the union, any party with the majority (remember the majority could have been the results of joint party voting position) however CCM’s vote bears the mandate of the people under the current existing pluralism of party politics, it could have been any party but the electorate chose CCM to form the government on both sides.

Therefore what argument do people have in denying those fact? Large number in CCM which forms the government on both sides of the union means they carry the 'tacit consent' of the people (because they elected them) based on the rules of political engagement and the mandate to govern and thus far the same people have yet to demand the new constitution. If you ask me all this got this far because CCM listens even to the concerns of the minority the whole process should never have happened in the first place.

To quote you "however CCM’s vote bears the mandate of the people under the current existing pluralism of party politics" first, this is not a political question to begin with and it would be a gross misinterpretation to make it so. Yet I am afraid that's their declared stance.

Happy Feet ,
For that to happen CCM on both sides have to differ in their opinions first regarding the union, until now both elected member and their senior cadres sit together in their NEC meetings, plan together and execute together, what makes you think that would change anytime sooner?

The only moral binding obligation CCM has, it is over its voters some of whom voted because of loyalty to the party, some because they trusted them in handling the union matters and some just thought they have good over all policies compared to other parties in the market.

Since we ignored the popular vote in deciding about the union, the democratic rights reside to the parliament where there are representative of the people a party with majority reps normally wins, thats how the cookies crumbles in politics. The rest are just your feeling come to think of it, most of your arguments are just those.

Again, I insist it is not a political question so let's not politicize but sensitise people and above all listen to them that's indeed a moral obligation that every government that brought about a new and legitimate constitution. To quote the Constitution of America begins with the famous words 'We the people.....' not I Thomas Jefferson or we the left or right.....

Happy Feet ,
I don’t know what to say about this to be honest Iran or Kenya taking Pemba and why are they demanding for independence again?

To be honest i was speaking of the geopolitical context where security comes first, being fully autonomous means znz will be free to make unilateral decisions on international affairs what has been a long standing 'kero ya muungano' from the znz side. How many times we here of banned oil tankers ceased bound to znz from Iran. Also I have talked to znz fellows they think znz is part of mombasa or rather mombasa is part of znz. The issue of boundaries even with mainland to is a long standing query that has been barried under the auspiciousiess of the Union

Happy Feet ,
I do agree with you on the foundation of CCM and earlier dominance, but remember we are now a multi party state. The position CCM finds itself in, is because the opposition is weak and not yet ready to be trusted. I wouldn't want such people to handle sensitive matters that could endanger our nation at the moment.

I am glad too to see finally we can agree on something but again it's not a matter at hand

 

[August]

Kwa Zanzibar kufanya mabadiliko ya katiba 2010ambayo yanaleta mtafaruku wa serikali tatu, wasaidizi wa raisi ikiwemo mwana sheria mkuu wa serikali alikuwa wapi?

 

[Averoes]

hayo mawazo ya selikari tatu ni mawazo ya mtu na mwananchi mwingine anayeona mufumo selikari mbili unafaa sasa kitu cha kushangaza nakujiuliza nikwanini huyu anaye taka mufumo wa selikari tatu aonekane yeye diyo wa maana au mtanzania kuliko mimi ninayeunga mkono mfumo selikari mbili?

Rudi Mgandini ukanywe mbege na ulanzi maana unaongea pumba. Macho yako yamejaa kijani kibichi huoni huoni wala husikii. Kama sii sii emu ilitaka serikali mbili kwani ilimkubalia JK kuteuwa tume ya Warioba na kuidhinisha mabilioni fedha za walipa kodi zitumike. Sasa tume imekusanya maoni inaruka kichura eti maoni ya wananchi hayafai na wewe nawe kama mbung'o unaona damu ya kijani ya mbogo inakauka unalia kilio cha mbwa mdomo juu.
Mnfsssss