Nakala za Hukumu, Kesi ya Liyumba!

[Mapinduzi]

Fani yenyewe ndio inahitaji kuongea ndugu! Dunia nzima wako hivyo, ni mdomo wako ndio utakaobadilisha "usiku kuwa mchana" (just kidding)!

asante kwa kukubal ukweli kuwa wanasheria wa bongo ni incompetent!

 

[Buchanan]

asante kwa kukubal ukweli kuwa wanasheria wa bongo ni incompetent!

Sijasema kuwa wanasheria WOTE bongo (labda hapa unamaanisha Tanzania) kuwa ni incompetent ndugu yangu Ama, umeniwekea maneno "mdomoni!" Nimezungumzia kuwa dunia nzima wanasheria ni waongeaji na kuongea haimaanishi kuwa incopetent hata kidogo! Labda nikuulize swali: Mwanasheria competent ni yupi? Anzia Legal Officers, State Attorneys, Advocates of the High Courts and Subordinate Courts, Solicitors, Magistrates and Judges, ukichambua kwa mifano halisi na Authorities if any, kulingana na utafiti wako kama upo! Ukitoa general comment, tena ya ku-prejudice, hautendi haki hata kidogo!

 

[Mapinduzi]

Sijasema kuwa wanasheria WOTE bongo (labda hapa unamaanisha Tanzania) kuwa ni incompetent ndugu yangu Ama, umeniwekea maneno "mdomoni!" Nimezungumzia kuwa dunia nzima wanasheria ni waongeaji na kuongea haimaanishi kuwa incopetent hata kidogo! Labda nikuulize swali: Mwanasheria competent ni yupi? Anzia Legal Officers, State Attorneys, Advocates, Solicitors, Magistrates and Judges, ukichambua kwa mifano halisi kulingana na utafiti wako kama upo!

Mheshimiwa, niliandika wanasheria wa bongo maneno meengi. Ukauliza wa wapi hawana maneno mengi. Nikakujibu kuwa wanasheria wa Tanzania maneno meeengi....... na kwamba wanaruka pale ukiwaquestion (kuhusu profession yao au kuwacritisize). Ulivyorespond unajua. Niconclude kutokana na response yako. Umeruka tena...lol!

 

[Buchanan]

Quote Originally Posted by Ama View Post
asante kwa kukubal ukweli kuwa wanasheria wa bongo ni incompetent!

Mheshimiwa, niliandika wanasheria wa bongo maneno meengi. Ukauliza wa wapi hawana maneno mengi. Nikakujibu kuwa wanasheria wa Tanzania maneno meeengi....... na kwamba wanaruka pale ukiwaquestion (kuhusu profession yao au kuwacritisize). Ulivyorespond unajua. Niconclude kutokana na response yako. Umeruka tena...lol!

Kwa hiyo kuruka criticism ndio kutokuwa competent?

 

[ngoshwe]

Umetoa wapi hicho kitu?

Nionyeshe hiyo sheria inayosema "Katika Mahakama za mwanzo, Mahakama ninawajibu wa kufuata maoni ya wazee wa baraza." Iko wapi?[/FONT][/SIZE]

Tafsri ipo wazi tu katika ya Kifungu cha 7(1) na (2) cha MCA, 1984 ambacho kinataka Mahakama za Mwanzo kuhusisha wazee wa Baaraza wakati wa kusikiliza mashauri yoyote yale. Nimesharejea awali hapo juu Kifungu cha 7 cha MCA, 1984.

Soma tena kifungu cha 7(2):

" 7 (2) of the Act provides further that "All matters in the primary court including a finding in any issue, the question of adjourning the hearing, an application for bail, a question of guilt or innocence of any accused person, the determination of sentence, the assessment of any monetary award and all questions and issues whatsoever shall, in the event of difference between a magistrate and the assessors or any of them, be decided by the votes of the majority of the magistrates and assessors present and in the event of an equality of votes the magistrate shall have the casting vote in addition to his deliberative vote.

Ndugu Ngoshwe na Tindikali, kama sijaelewa kifungu hicho hapo juu, esp sehemu niliyo-underline, nielewesheni, please! Kwa mfano assessors wawili wamekubaliana mshtakiwa aachiwe huru, huku Hakimu ameona kwamba ana hatia na afungwe, what next?

Dhana ya kuwa na wazee wa baraza katka mahakama za mwanzo ni kuishauri mahakama. Inapofikia wazee wote wamekubalina, mahakama haiwana budi kufuata ushauri wa wazee wa baraza hata kama haikubaliani nao. Hapo hakimu anakuwa hana kura ya turufu (casting vote) isipokuwa kama wazee wametofautiana maoni.

Katika kesi ya Ali Nyambwe v Mwanaidi Rashidi, (1987) Tanzania Law Reports 131, iliamriwa kuwa hakimu wa Mahakama ya Mwanzo hawezi kupingana na maoni ya wazee wa Baraza hata kama yapo kinyume na ukweli. ( "....a magistrate may not ignore assessors however perverse their opinion may appear to the magistrate")

 

[Buchanan]

Tafsri ipo wazi tu katika ya Kifungu cha 7(1) na (2) cha MCA, 1984 ambacho kinataka Mahakama za Mwanzo kuhusisha wazee wa Baaraza wakati wa kusikiliza mashauri yoyote yale. Nimesharejea awali hapo juu Kifungu cha 7 cha MCA, 1984.

Soma tena kifungu cha 7(2):

" 7 (2) of the Act provides further that "All matters in the primary court including a finding in any issue, the question of adjourning the hearing, an application for bail, a question of guilt or innocence of any accused person, the determination of sentence, the assessment of any monetary award and all questions and issues whatsoever shall, in the event of difference between a magistrate and the assessors or any of them, be decided by the votes of the majority of the magistrates and assessors present and in the event of an equality of votes the magistrate shall have the casting vote in addition to his deliberative vote.




Dhana ya kuwa na wazee wa baraza katka mahakama za mwanzo ni kuishauri mahakama. Inapofikia wazee wote wamekubalina, mahakama haiwana budi kufuata ushauri wa wazee wa baraza hata kama haikubaliani nao. Hapo hakimu anakuwa hana kura ya turufu (casting vote) isipokuwa kama wazee wametofautiana maoni.

Katika kesi ya Ali Nyambwe v Mwanaidi Rashidi, (1987) Tanzania Law Reports 131, iliamriwa kuwa hakimu wa Mahakama ya Mwanzo hawezi kupingana na maoni ya wazee wa Baraza hata kama yapo kinyume na ukweli. ( "....a magistrate may not ignore assessors however perverse their opinion may appear to the magistrate")

Ubarikiwe ndugu Ngoshwe kwa maelezo yako yenye ushawishi mkubwa! Ngoja tumsubiri Tindikali atupatie AUTHORITY (statutory, case law, textbook, etc) inayosema kwamba maamuzi ya "majority" ya wazee wa Baraza NOT BINDING!

 

[Tindikali]

Tafsri ipo wazi tu katika ya Kifungu cha 7(1) na (2) cha MCA, 1984 ambacho kinataka Mahakama za Mwanzo kuhusisha wazee wa Baaraza wakati wa kusikiliza mashauri yoyote yale.

Achana na habari ya kuhusisha. Ni wapi kwenye sheria iliposemwa "…...Katika Mahakama za mwanzo, Mahakama ninawajibu wa kufuata maoni ya wazee wa baraza"???

Katika kesi ya Ali Nyambwe v Mwanaidi Rashidi, (1987) Tanzania Law Reports 131, iliamriwa kuwa hakimu wa Mahakama ya Mwanzo hawezi kupingana na maoni ya wazee wa Baraza hata kama yapo kinyume na ukweli. ( "....a magistrate may not ignore assessors however perverse their opinion may appear to the magistrate")

Wachaga wanasema "Yesu na Maria..."!!!

Hukumu imesema "magistrate may not ignore assessors…" wewe unatutafsiria kwamba hayo maneno maana yake "hakimu hawezi kupingana na maoni ya wazee wa Baraza…" Huo sio uongo huo? Maana ya maneno hayo, kama hujui, ni hakimu hawezi kudharau wazee wa baraza, hayamaanishi hawezi kupingana na maoni ya wazee wa baraza. Mtume! Ingekuwa hakimu hawezi kupingana na wazee wa baraza kusingekuwa na kupiga kura kati ya hakimu na wazee wa baraza!

Kumbe tungekuwa hatudai vyanzo mngekuwa mnatudanganya tu hapa, duuu!

Mzee Tindikali naona ni mtaalamu zaidi wa lugha ya Kiingereza,

Mathalan hicho kitu hapo, ukiambiwa hebu onyesha maandishi ya huyo mtu, sentensi moja, au neno moja tu, tuone utaalam wake wa hiyo lugha, utaweza kuonyesha? Tilia maanani kila unachoongea, usijitamkie tu.

 

[Buchanan]

Hukumu imesema "magistrate may not ignore assessors…" wewe unatutafsiria kwamba hayo maneno maana yake "hakimu hawezi kupingana na maoni ya wazee wa Baraza…" Huo sio uongo huo? Maana ya maneno hayo, kama hujui, ni hakimu hawezi kudharau wazee wa baraza, hayamaanishi hawezi kupingana na maoni ya wazee wa baraza. Mtume! Ingekuwa hakimu hawezi kupingana na wazee wa baraza kusingekuwa na kupiga kura kati ya hakimu na wazee wa baraza!

Kumbe tungekuwa hatudai vyanzo mngekuwa mnatudanganya tu hapa, duuu!

Jaji CHIPETA alikuwa na haya ya kusema katika kesi ya ALI NYEMBWE v MWANAIDI RASHIDI [1987] TLR 131 (HC) katika ukurasa wa 133:
"Without labouring the point, I respectfully agree with the learned principal district magistrate that the learned primary court magistrate of the court of first instance clearly acted contrary to express statutory provisions. Section 7 (2) of the Magistrate's Court Act, 1984 unambiguously states:
(2) All matters in the primary court including a finding of any issue, the question of adjourning a hearing, application for bail, a question of guilt or innocence of any accused person, the determination of sentence, the assessment of any monetary award and all questions and issues what-soever shall, in the event of difference between a magistrate and the assessors or any of them, be decided by votes of the majority of the magistrate and assessors present and in the event of an equality of votes the magistrate shall have the casting vote in addition to his deliberative vote.
In the present case, the court was constituted by the primary court magistrate and two gentlemen assessors. Since the two gentlemen assessors were unanimous in their finding, the learned primary court magistrate had no option but to draw up a judgement of the court containing the decision of the majority of the court and the reasons for the decision.
The learned primary court magistrate, therefore, had no authority to overrule the unanimous opinions of the two gentlemen assessors however perverse their opinions might have appeared to him. The only option the learned magistrate had was to write his dissenting opinion.
The result in this case, then, is that there was, in effect, no judgement, and such "order" as was purportedly made by the learned magistrate had no legal validity." (Emphasis supplied).

 

[ngoshwe]

Ubarikiwe ndugu Ngoshwe kwa maelezo yako yenye ushawishi mkubwa! Ngoja tumsubiri Tindikali atupatie AUTHORITY (statutory, case law, textbook, etc) inayosema kwamba maamuzi ya "majority" ya wazee wa Baraza NOT BINDING!

You may as well wish to revist the Articles on "JURIES AND LAY ASSESSORS IN THE COMMONWEALTH:
A CONTEMPORARY SURVEY" (2000) by NEIL VIDMAR at http://www.springerlink.com/content/w8w12651544630j2/fulltext.pdfAt page 395 the Author explains the role of assesors in judicials system of Tanzania as follows:

"In Tanzania all trials before the High Court (which includes the industrial court and the Economic Crimes Court) are held with the aid of assessors. Assessors are persons between the ages of twenty-one and sixty.

Two or more sit with a magistrate or judge and assist with their special knowledge of the subject matter before the court. The opinions of assessors are not binding on the court. In District and Magistrates Courts, assessors may be used where a rule of customary or Islamic law is relevant and when the court is directed to do so by an appropriate judicial authority. Opinions of assessors are not binding on these courts. ​

In the Primary Court, the magistrate sits with not fewer than two assessors; the decision is by majority and it is binding on the magistrate. In the event of a tie the magistrate casts a vote in addition to his or her deliberative vote to break the deadlock."​

 

[Tindikali]

Ubarikiwe ndugu Ngoshwe kwa maelezo yako yenye ushawishi mkubwa! Ngoja tumsubiri Tindikali atupatie AUTHORITY (statutory, case law, textbook, etc) inayosema ...

"Textbook" haina nguvu ya kuwa "authority" katika mahakama. Wanasheria wa wapi nyinyi? Mamlaka au vyanzo vyenye nguvu ya kisheria katika mahakama za Tanzania na nchi nyingi zilizorithi Common Law ni baadhi ya maamuzi ya nyuma ya baadhi ya mahakama, pamoja na sheria ya bunge na kanuni zake. Si vitabu!

Na si mimi niliedai kwamba maoni ya wazee ni "not binding" au vinginevyo. Aliyetoa madai ndio anabeba mzigo wa kuthibitisha. Mimi nimeomba ithibitishwe, ionyeshwe sheria ya bunge au kesi inayosema hivyo.

Buchanan na, au, Ngoshwe, unachemsha, sheria zako cha mtoto,siku njema.

 

[ngoshwe]

Achana na habari ya kuhusisha. Ni wapi kwenye sheria iliposemwa "…...Katika Mahakama za mwanzo, Mahakama ninawajibu wa kufuata maoni ya wazee wa baraza"???

Wachaga wanasema "Yesu na Maria..."!!!

Hukumu imesema "magistrate may not ignore assessors…" wewe unatutafsiria kwamba hayo maneno maana yake "hakimu hawezi kupingana na maoni ya wazee wa Baraza…" Huo sio uongo huo? Maana ya maneno hayo, kama hujui, ni hakimu hawezi kudharau wazee wa baraza, hayamaanishi hawezi kupingana na maoni ya wazee wa baraza. Mtume! Ingekuwa hakimu hawezi kupingana na wazee wa baraza kusingekuwa na kupiga kura kati ya hakimu na wazee wa baraza!

Kumbe tungekuwa hatudai vyanzo mngekuwa mnatudanganya tu hapa, duuu!



Mathalan hicho kitu hapo, ukiambiwa hebu onyesha maandishi ya huyo mtu, sentensi moja, au neno moja tu, tuone utaalam wake wa hiyo lugha, utaweza kuonyesha? Tilia maanani kila unachoongea, usijitamkie tu.

Ebu jaribu kuleta vielelezo vya kukanusha yale ambayo unaona hukubaliani nayo hapa na sio kuibuka na maoni ya jumla tu bila "authorities"
kwa mfumo huu, kila mtu hata "lay man" anaweza kubishana tu hata kwa mwaka mzima. Ni vyema pia kama huna ushahidi wa kuweza kutetea hoja zako ukakaa kimya kuliko kuanza kupinga hoja bila "authorities". Na hii imesababisha mpaka hoja iliyokuwa ikijadiliwa hapa imetoka nje ya mada. Iwapo unahitaji kujifunza zaidi jaribu kuwa na "constructive arguments".

 

[Buchanan]

You may as well wish to revist the Articles on "JURIES AND LAY ASSESSORS IN THE COMMONWEALTH:
A CONTEMPORARY SURVEY" (2000) by NEIL VIDMAR at http://www.springerlink.com/content/w8w12651544630j2/fulltext.pdfAt page 395 the Author explains the role of assesors in judicials system of Tanzania as follows:

"In Tanzania all trials before the High Court (which includes the industrial court and the Economic Crimes Court) are held with the aid of assessors. Assessors are persons between the ages of twenty-one and sixty.

Two or more sit with a magistrate or judge and assist with their special knowledge of the subject matter before the court. The opinions of assessors are not binding on the court. In District and Magistrates Courts, assessors may be used where a rule of customary or Islamic law is relevant and when the court is directed to do so by an appropriate judicial authority. Opinions of assessors are not binding on these courts. ​

In the Primary Court, the magistrate sits with not fewer than two assessors; the decision is by majority and it is binding on the magistrate. In the event of a tie the magistrate casts a vote in addition to his or her deliberative vote to break the deadlock."​

Naona link uliyotoa hapo juu imegoma kufunguka, sijui tatizo ni nini hapo!

 

[Buchanan]

Na si mimi niliedai kwamba maoni ya wazee ni "not binding" au vinginevyo. Aliyetoa madai ndio anabeba mzigo wa kuthibitisha. Mimi nimeomba ithibitishwe, ionyeshwe sheria ya bunge au kesi inayosema hivyo.

Buchanan na, au, Ngoshwe, unachemsha, sheria zako cha mtoto,siku njema.

Jaji CHIPETA alikuwa na haya ya kusema katika kesi ya ALI NYEMBWE v MWANAIDI RASHIDI [1987] TLR 131 (HC) katika ukurasa wa 133:
"Without labouring the point, I respectfully agree with the learned principal district magistrate that the learned primary court magistrate of the court of first instance clearly acted contrary to express statutory provisions. Section 7 (2) of the Magistrate's Court Act, 1984 unambiguously states:
(2) All matters in the primary court including a finding of any issue, the question of adjourning a hearing, application for bail, a question of guilt or innocence of any accused person, the determination of sentence, the assessment of any monetary award and all questions and issues what-soever shall, in the event of difference between a magistrate and the assessors or any of them, be decided by votes of the majority of the magistrate and assessors present and in the event of an equality of votes the magistrate shall have the casting vote in addition to his deliberative vote.
In the present case, the court was constituted by the primary court magistrate and two gentlemen assessors. Since the two gentlemen assessors were unanimous in their finding, the learned primary court magistrate had no option but to draw up a judgement of the court containing the decision of the majority of the court and the reasons for the decision.
The learned primary court magistrate, therefore, had no authority to overrule the unanimous opinions of the two gentlemen assessors however perverse their opinions might have appeared to him. The only option the learned magistrate had was to write his dissenting opinion.
The result in this case, then, is that there was, in effect, no judgement, and such "order" as was purportedly made by the learned magistrate had no legal validity." (Emphasis supplied).

Mbona umepewa Sheria ya Bunge, MCA, 1984 pamoja na kesi hiyo hapo juu (ALI NYEMBWE v MWANAIDI RASHIDI [1987] TLR 131 (HC)), Au ulitaka upewe Sheria ipi na kesi ipi ndugu Tindikali?

 

[Buchanan]

"Textbook" haina nguvu ya kuwa "authority" katika mahakama. Wanasheria wa wapi nyinyi? Mamlaka au vyanzo vyenye nguvu ya kisheria katika mahakama za Tanzania na nchi nyingi zilizorithi Common Law ni baadhi ya maamuzi ya nyuma ya baadhi ya mahakama, pamoja na sheria ya bunge na kanuni zake. Si vitabu!

Soma sehemu ya Hukumu ya Kesi ya JULIUS PETRO v COSMAS RAPHAEL [1983] TLR 346 (CA) ambapo Jaji Mwalusanya alitumia Kamusi (Kitabu) katika kutafuta maana ya neno! Unataka kuniambia Kamusi hii (kitabu) nayo ilipitishwa na Bunge au ni maamuzi ya nyuma ya Mahakama?
"Under s. 29(2) of MCA Cap. 537 a party can only be represented by 'any relative or any member of his or her household'. As to what is 'relative' it is not defined but I would settle for the definition given by the Concise D Oxford Dictionary 5th Ed. (1975) that a relative is a kinsman or kinswoman to whom one is related by blood or marriage."

 

[ngoshwe]

Soma sehemu ya Hukumu ya Kesi ya JULIUS PETRO v COSMAS RAPHAEL [1983] TLR 346 (CA) ambapo Jaji Mwalusanya alitumia Kamusi (Kitabu) katika kutafuta maana ya neno! Unataka kuniambia Kamusi hii (kitabu) nayo ilipitishwa na Bunge au ni maamuzi ya nyuma ya Mahakama?
"Under s. 29(2) of MCA Cap. 537 a party can only be represented by 'any relative or any member of his or her household'. As to what is 'relative' it is not defined but I would settle for the definition given by the Concise D Oxford Dictionary 5th Ed. (1975) that a relative is a kinsman or kinswoman to whom one is related by blood or marriage."

Ongezea na hapa katika hii kesi tunayojadili:

IN THE RESIDENT MAGISTRATE'S COURT OF DAR ES SALAAM

AT KISUTU
CRIMINAL CASE NO 105 OF 2009
REPUBLIC
VERSUS
AMATUS JOACHIM LIYUMBA
JUDGMENT OF THE COURT​

BEFORE : - L.M. MLACHA, PRM
B.B. MWINGWA, SRM​

On the second ingredient, we appreciate the way the Republic tried to define key terms. The definition of "abuse" as seen in Black's Law Dictionary 8th Edition and as correctly quoted by the Republic is "Departure from legal or reasonable use or misuse". We are in agreement with this definition as well as the definition of "abuse of authority" given by S.L. Salwan and N. Narang Legal Dictionary 18th Ed (2008). The latter is defined this way; "A statutory authority is liable if he does not conform to the procedure prescribed by Law". In simple language, a person is said to abuse the authority of his office if he does or omits to do an act contrary to the Law or proscribed procedures"

 

[ngoshwe]

"Textbook" haina nguvu ya kuwa "authority" katika mahakama. Wanasheria wa wapi nyinyi? Mamlaka au vyanzo vyenye nguvu ya kisheria katika mahakama za Tanzania na nchi nyingi zilizorithi Common Law ni baadhi ya maamuzi ya nyuma ya baadhi ya mahakama, pamoja na sheria ya bunge na kanuni zake. Si vitabu!

Na si mimi niliedai kwamba maoni ya wazee ni "not binding" au vinginevyo. Aliyetoa madai ndio anabeba mzigo wa kuthibitisha. Mimi nimeomba ithibitishwe, ionyeshwe sheria ya bunge au kesi inayosema hivyo.

Buchanan na, au, Ngoshwe, unachemsha, sheria zako cha mtoto,siku njema.

Tindikali yawezekana utakuwa hujasoma au kumaliza masomo vizuri masomo ya sheria kama si "Mwanasheria Pori (Bush lawyer)".


Ebu soma vizuri tena na tena hii kauli yako uone pia ni jinsi gani usivyoelewa unachokieleza na hata kujua kwa undani hizo "sources of law" na mfumo wa sheria za Tanzania (Tanzanian Legal Sytem):

"Mamlaka au vyanzo vyenye nguvu ya kisheria katika mahakama za Tanzania na nchi nyingi zilizorithi Common Law ni baadhi ya maamuzi ya nyuma ya baadhi ya mahakama, pamoja na sheria ya bunge na kanuni zake. Si vitabu!"


Nasikitika kukueleza kuwa haya unayozungumza kama "sources of law" au "authorities" kwenye Mahakama huwa yanafundishwa vizuri sana katika mwaka wa kwanza tu wa masomo ya sheria iwe kwenye ngazi ya cheti, stashahada na shahada.

Kama ungeelewa somo la sheria vyema, ungeweza kutofautisha "vyanzo vya sheria (sources of laws)" ambazo ndio msingi wa maamuzi ya mahakama zetu (authorities) na " wapi unaweza kupata/kutafuta "sheria"(where to find/locate law or legal materials)" ambapo humo unapata hizo sheria/kanuni za kuweza kushawishi mahakama (source of information).

Unapoambiwa "text book" au kitabu haimaanishi kuwa hicho ndio chanzo cha Sheria au "authority" mzee.

Kitabu kinaweza kutumika na kurejewa katika maamuzi ya Mahakama ikiwa kina kanuni ambayo Mahakama itashawishika kuwa ni sheria. Kwa mfano hizo "kesi zilizopita za mahakama za juu zenye mamalaka ya maamuzi ya ushawishi na msingi (precedents), sheria za bunge, mila, ni lazima zime zimetoka katika chanzo fulani unachoweza kukitoa mahakamani kama kielelezo. Ikiwa kesi zinapatikana kwenye vitabu unaweza kuzirejea Mahakamani hicho kitabu baba.

Mahakama pia utumia vitabu kama vielelezo kwenye hoja inayohitaji maelezo na sio lazima iwe msingi wa sheria, kwa mfano katika tafsiri ya maneno, kamusi yaweza kutumia, katika kujua kwa kina habari ya jambo fulani lenye msingi kwenye hoja zinazobishaniwa, kitabu chaweza kutumika pia kuipa mahakama mwanga zaidi. Soma hukumu za Mahakama utaelewa hili!.

Hapa sidhani kama mleta hoja alimaanisha Kitabu (text book) ni chanzo cha sheria au "authority" kama ulivyojaribu kutafsiri kwa haraka mno bila kufikiri!.


Ukiweza angalia hapa kwa kujifunza pia http://www.nyulawglobal.org/globalex/tanzania.htm#_Secondary_Source_of_Information

 

[Buchanan]

Na si mimi niliedai kwamba maoni ya wazee ni "not binding" au vinginevyo. Aliyetoa madai ndio anabeba mzigo wa kuthibitisha. Mimi nimeomba ithibitishwe, ionyeshwe sheria ya bunge au kesi inayosema hivyo.

Sasa mbwembwe zote zilikuwa za nini? Naona wewe ni mtaalam tu wa lugha ya Kiingereza na si Mwanasheria kama nilivyoanza kuamini tangu ulipovamia mjadala huu, japokuwa katika mjadala huu umetumia Lugha yetu ya Taifa, Kiswahili na si Kiingereza unachokifagilia! Kama ni Mwanasheria basi ni "Bush Lawyer!" Ukiweza, kasirika!

 

[ngoshwe]

"

Na si mimi niliedai kwamba maoni ya wazee ni "not binding" au vinginevyo. Aliyetoa madai ndio anabeba mzigo wa kuthibitisha. Mimi nimeomba ithibitishwe, ionyeshwe sheria ya bunge au kesi inayosema hivyo.

Buchanan na, au, Ngoshwe, unachemsha, sheria zako cha mtoto,siku njema.

Nzee Tindikali, unaonekana si msomi ambae yupo tayari kukubaliana na hoja ambazo amezitoa wakati hana uhakika na jambo hivyo. Kukosea si dhambi katika taaluma, dhambi ni kubishana na ukweli pasipo kuwa na msingi wala vigezo kama unavyojaribu kuonyesha hapa. Dhambi hii wengine imewapotezea heshima kwenye jamii na kuonekana wababaishaji!

Kama hukujua kitu ungeweka bayana, uliomba "mamlaka" tena na tena juu ya suala la maoni ya wazee kwenye Mahakama za Mwanzo na Mahakama Kuu, ukakandamiza kwa msisitizo. Sasa unasema sio wewe uliedai kwamba maoni ya wazee ni "not binding" au vinginevyo. Unaeleza haya wala pasipo kubainisha wazi ni nani huyo aliesema kuhusu "maoni ya wazee" . Huku ni kukosa uwajibikaji wa kitaaluma na ni hatari pia kwako kwani huonyeshi kuwa unafanya uchunguzi wa jambo ili ikusaidie unaposimama kubishana au kujitetea!.

Wakati sasa unadai si wewe uliyesema, umesahau kurejea hata posts zako za huko nyuma kuona jinsi gani usivyotaka kukiri kuwa huelewi na pia hutaki kujifunza. Nakukumbusha hapa hzi posts zako ili uone jinsi usivyokuwa mkweli na unaetaka kubishana tu kama majukwaa mengine ya kidini na siasa (tungekuwa kule hakika tungebishana sana, lakini hapa uwe unakuja na "principles" zinazosimamia hoja zako kama msomi:

Tuchambue mahakimu, lakini tungeanza na wewe kwanza, Mwanasheria wetu hapa

Haya, tuendelee na uchambuzi na kudadavua hukumu. Naomba mamlaka, au chanzo chako kuwa Wazee wa Baraza ni lazima wafuatwe kwenye Mahakama ya Mwanzo na si lazima Mahakama Kuu.

Ukiombwa "mamlaka" ya kitu ulichodai maana yake utoe sheria au uamuzi wa kesi inayosindikiza kile ulichokisema. Hivyo nilimuomba Buchanan anambie ametoa wapi madai yake kwamba Wazee wa Baraza mahakama za mwanzo lazima wafuatwe walichoamua na Mahakama Kuu si lazima.

Si umesema wote tunajifunza siku zote, basi usiseme umesikitika, si tunajifunza? Ni kitu chanya.

Umetupa somo hapa kwamba katika Mahakama ya Mwanzo kile walichoamua wazee wa Baraza lazima kifatwe, na si Mahakama Kuu. Naomba mamlaka au chanzo cha kisheria ulikotoa madai hayo.

Eee bana, manake tumepewa somo hapa, kwamba, katika Mahakama ya Mwanzo kile kinachoamuliwa na Wazee wa Baraza ni lazima kifatwe, lakini Mahakama Kuu si lazima. Sasa bwana/bibi Buchanan anaombwa mamlaka ya madai hayo, kaitoa wapi habari hiyo? Hajajibu, badala yake anaanza oooh, maneno yangu mimi mekundu, ya hakimu ya bluu, meusi si yangu....wakati yote, ya rangi zote, yana michemko.

Ngoshwe ukiweza tusaidie bana... ametoa wapi habari hiyo huyu Buchanan... hahahaa....

Tusizunguke mibuyu, wapi waliposema uamuzi wa wazee wa baraza mahakama ya mwanzo lazima ufatwe?

Umetoa wapi hicho kitu?

Nionyeshe hiyo sheria inayosema "Katika Mahakama za mwanzo, Mahakama ninawajibu wa kufuata maoni ya wazee wa baraza." Iko wapi?

 

[Buchanan]

Katika fani yoyote kujifunza hakuishi siku zote. Kwa upande wa fani ya Sheria kuna vitu vipya (Legal concepts and principles) zinazaliwa kila siku kwa maana kwamba kifungu kimoja cha Sheria kinaweza kutafsiriwa hivi leo na miaka michache ijayo kinatafsiriwa vinginevyo kulingana na facts za wakati ule, ndio maana kuna kitu kinaitwa "distinguishing!" Ndio maana vile vile majaji na mahakimu huwa wanafikia mahali wanasema "It is a settled principle that...! Sasa hapa ukianza kuwa na mbwembwe utaaibika muda si mrefu!
Sasa ndugu yetu Tindikali anadhani kwamba ameshamaliza na anatakiwa akalie "kiti cha hukumu" ili kuwakejeli wengine! Kwa mwendo huo ataiona fani chungu!