Mama Amon
JF-Expert Member
- Mar 30, 2018
- 2,021
- 2,479
Mwanasheria Mkuu wa Serikali, Jaji Feleshi, anasema kuwa katika Mkataba wa awali kati ya Tanzania na Dubai "hakuna kipengele kinachosema kuwa Dubai imeuziwa Bandari za Tanzania."
Kisheria, kauli hii sio kweli hata kidogo. Hivyo, napenda kujenga hoja ya kuonyesha kwamba, katika Mkataba wa awali kati ya Tanzania na Dubai "kuna vipengele vingi vinavyoonyesha kuwa Dubai imeuziwa Bandari za Tanzania." Na hoja yangu nikama ifuatavyo:
1. Kisheria, kauli kwamba "Mtu X anayo haki ya umiliki kamili juu ya mali Y" ni kauli yenye kumaanisha jambo moja kati ya mambo matano yafuatayo:
(a) haki ya mtu X kutumia, kwa muda maalum, mali ya mtu Y, na kuzuia watu baki kuitumia; yaani, "temporary use ownership rights," au
(b) haki ya mtu X kutumia, kwa muda wote, mali ya mtu Y, na kuzuia watu baki kuitumia; yaani, "eternal use ownership rights," au
(c) haki ya mtu X kufaidi, kwa muda maalum, mali ya mtu Y, na kuzuia watu baki kuifaidi; yaani, "temporary fruits ownership rights," au
(d) haki ya mtu X kufaidi, kwa muda wote, mali ya mtu Y, na kuzuia watu baki kuifaidi; yaani, "eternal fruits ownership rights," au
(e) haki ya mtu X kuuza, kukodisha, kugawa, kubadilisha matumizi, au kuharibu mali yake, yaani, "substantive ownership rights,"
2. Maneno "kukodisha mali" yanaweza kumaanisha ama (a) kuhamisha haki ya kutumia mali, kwa muda maalum, kutoka kwa mtu mmoja hadi mtu mwingine; au (b) kuhamisha haki ya kufaidi mali, kwa muda maalum, kutoka kwa mtu mmoja hadi mtu mwingine.
3. Maneno "kuuza mali" yanaweza kumaanisha ama (a) kuhamisha haki ya kutumia mali, kwa muda wote, kutoka kwa mtu mmoja hadi mtu mwingine; au (b) kuhamisha haki ya kufaidi mali, kwa muda wote, kutoka kwa mtu mmoja hadi mtu mwingine; au (c) kuhamisha haki ya kuuza, kukodisha, kugawa, kubadilisha matumizi, au kuharibu mali, kwa muda wote, kutoka kwa mtu mmoja hadi mtu mwingine.
4. Ibara ya 4(1) katika mkataba wa Tanzania-Dubai inataja wigo wa maeneo ya ushirikiano kwa kurejea kiambatanisho namba moja. Kiambatanisho kinasema maeneo yafuatayo yatakayokuwa chini ya udhibiti wa kampuni ya DP World pekee, kati ya mengine mengi:
- Watadhibiti gati la kuhudumia meli za magari katika eneo la Gerezani
- katika Bandari ya Dar es Salaam (Gati ya RORO namba 0) ,
- Watadhibiti General Cargo Terminal (Gati namba 1 hadi 4) katika Bandari ya Dar es Salaam
- Watadhibiti Container Terminal (Gati namba 5 hadi 7) katika Bandari ya Dar es Salaam.
- Watadhibiti eneo la Kwala Inland Container Depot na Kurasni bandari kabla ya lango.
- Watadhibiti kituo kipya cha Container katika RoRo & General Cargo Berths, ikiunganisha yadi ya RoRo na EPZA kwa kujenga Hifadhi ya Gari ya Horofa nyingi na Kuboresha yadi ya RoRo ya General Cargo & Container Yard.
- Watajenga na kudhibiti majukwaa ya vifaa, maeneo maalum ya kiuchumi, mbuga za viwanda na miundombinu mingine ya vifaa muhimu.
- Watajenga na kudhibiti bandari za ziada katika Bahari ya Hindi
- Watasimamia biashara kati ya Tanzania na Nchi za jirani kupitia bandari zilizoko Ziwa Viktoria.
- Watasimamia biashara kati ya Tanzania na Nchi za jirani kupitia bandari zilizoko Ziwa Tanganyika.
- Watasimamia biashara kati ya Tanzania na Nchi za jirani kupitia bandari zilizoko Ziwa Nyasa.
7. Ukweli ni kwamba: serikali imetoa haki zifuatazo kwa DP World: "eternal use ownership rights," "eternal fruits ownership rights," jambo ambalo ni sawa na kuwapa DP World "substantive ownership rights" kupitia mlango wa uani.
8. Kwa hiyo, kwa mujibu wa wigo na malengo ya mkataba wa Tanzania-Dubai, katika Kiambatanisho Namba 01, Tanzania tumeuza, na Dubai wamenunua, umiliki wa bandari uliotajwa kwenye sehemu 1(b) na sehemu 1(d) hapo juu, yaani: tumeuza kwa Dubai haki ya kutumia, kwa muda wote, mali inayoitwa bandari, na tumeuza kwa Dubai haki ya kupata faida, kwa muda wote, kutotokana na mali inayoitwa bandari;
9. Huo ndio ulaghai uliogfanywa na Waarabu wa Dubai dhidi ya Wabantu wa Tanzania. Ni sawa na ulgahai wa Wajerumani waliomtuma Karl Peters kuja kwa Wabantu, ulaghai uliofanywa kupitia Mikataba kama ule wa Chifu Mangungo wa Musovero, huko Kilosa, mwaka 1884. Yaani historia mbaya, yenye kuthibitisha ujinga wa Wabantu, imejirudia baada ya miaka 140 iliyopita.
10. Kwa hiyo, Mwanasheria Mkuu wa Serikali, Jaji Feleshi, anapotosha Taifa anaposema kwamba, katika Mkataba wa awali kati ya Tanzania na Dubai "hakuna kipengele kinachosema kuwa Dubai imeuziwa Bandari za Tanzania." Vifungu vipo vingi.
11. Inawezekana Jaji Feleshi akaleta pingamizi kwamba, chini ya Sheria ya Ardhi (1999), vifungu vya 19-23, umiliki wa Dubai juu ya bandari zetu, kama ulivyofafanuliwa hapo juu, sio wa milele, bali wa miaka 99, kupitia hati ya ardhi itakayotolewa na serikali.
12. Lakini, napindua pingamizi hili kwa kusema kuwa: kifungu cha 23(4) kama kikisomwa pamoja na kifungo cha 20, katika mkataba wa Tanzania-Dubai, kina nguvu kuliko Sheria ya Ardhi ya Tanzania (1999), maana hakitoi mamlaka kwa Baraza la usuluhishi kuvunja mapatano haya.
13. Jaji Feleshi na serikali ya Awamu ya Sita, chini ya Rais Samia Suluhu Hassan, wakubali kwamba wamekosea, wajisahihishe haraka, waombe msahama. Kuuza enzi ya nchi ni Kosa Kubwa kuliko makosa yote yanayoweza kufanywa na serikali. Ni Kashfa Kuu ya Milenia ya Tatu.
14. Mwisho, natoa wito kwa UVCCM kuunda kikosikazi-fikra (think-tank) ili kuchunguza mkataba huu na kuwashauri wazee wa chama kuhusu mapungufu yaliyomo. Akili ya wazee tayari imegota. Fikra za vijana ndio zitakuwa uhai wa chama cha Mapinduzi.
Kiambatanisho: Marejeo muhimu
Kwa ajili ya kujiimarisha kifikra nimetumia kitabu cha Milton A. Gonsalves (1963), kiitwacho "Fagothey's Right and Reason: Ethics in Theory and Practice," Toleo la 7, kama kilivyochapishwa na kampuni ya C. V. Mosby, huko St. Louis, Marekani.
Katika kitabu hiki, sura ya 29 yenye kichwa cha maneno 'Property," has ukuraswa wa 392, inatwambia mawazo muhimu yafuatayo kuhusu mali na umiliki wake:
"Ownership may be defined as the right of exclusive control and disposal over a thing at will. It is:
1. A right. Thus we distinguish between ownership and the mere holding of a thing in one's possession. A thief has possession of stolen goods, but he does not own them because he cannot acquire a right to them.
2. Exclusive. This means keeping others from the use of the thing owned. A thing over which everybody has equal rights is not owned at all. Several or many persons may own a thing together, either in joint ownership or as a corporation, but anyone outside the group is excluded from the property. Exclusiveness is probably the most prominent element of ownership, and only by destroying its exclusiveness can the right of ownership be breached.
3. Control and disposal. This means doing anything possible with it: keeping, changing, giving away, selling, using, consuming, destroying. Of itself ownership is unlimited, though limitation may come from another source: from rights of a higher order, from charity to the neighbor, or from the civil law.
4. Over a thing. The matter of the right cannot be further detailed except to say that whatever can be controlled or disposed of can be owned. We think of it first as a material object, but it can be actions, services, good will, or credit.
5. At will. The owner acts for himself, in his own name, and need consult no one else as far as mere ownership is concerned. An agent or trustee may be given the right to control a thing or dispose of it, but only on behalf of the owner and in his name.
Property may be defined as that which is owned or that over which one has the exclusive right of control and disposal at will. Not everything is or can become property.
The air, the sunlight, the ocean cannot be owned and can never be property; they must remain common.
Wild beasts, fish in the sea, land in an unexplored wilderness are not actually owned but can be; they are potentially property but actually nobody's; they are common now but need not remain so.
There are various kinds of ownership, a few of which we can define briefly. Since a group can be an owner, and there is no limit to the size of this group, the whole community as such can own property: the federal government, the state, the county, the city. This is public as opposed to private ownership.
In all ownership we must consider the substance of the thing owned as distinct from its use and fruits.
Full ownership supposes rights of control over all three. Limited ownership denotes rights of control over any one or two of these, but not over all three together. Lending, borrowing, renting, leasing, and the like render ownership limited.
Only the one who retains control over the substance is properly called the owner, but it is obvious that the other has partial property rights in the matter and hence some sort of limited ownership.
Ownership over the substance is called direct ownership; ownership over the use or fruits or both is referred to as indirect ownership.”
