New administration under Samia Suluhu gives hope after 5 years of hopelessness

This EWURA letter in their Instagram account neither appendages the name nor the signature of the author, and the reasons to distance themselves from hiking gas prices based on the law are spurious.

The less we excoriate the contents of this letter the better for all.


Get rid of the EWURA top management and the Board of Directors, they do not know what they are doing.

Gas prices need to go down not to go up because gas companies have the lowest operational costs in Tanzania compared to elsewhere unless they are also paying influence peddlers like those in EWURA and in the ministry of energy then they will be having a "chip on the shoulder" to unburden themselves into the poor of the poorest.

Curiously, since Makamba Jr became the energy boss everything is falling apart from power rationing now to spiking locally produced natural gas.

We are also projecting that fuel prices will soon see huge increases for the same reasons. The major reason fuel prices go up is dampening of competition through cartels in the name of "bulk suppliers" who bribe top bosses at EWURA and in ministry of energy. The few cartels running the show regularly conduct meetings to agree on selling price, and consumers are the ones carrying the can.
262202839_578246239907591_1128059375408618081_n%20(1).jpg
 
As much as there is no love lost with Bashite, but the truth needs to be shouted out that he has no case to answer.

Our Magistrates did not go to schools when schools were really schools.

This Kubenea prosecution has no basis in law, at all. The seminal issues the Magistrates Court ought to have resolved are;- locus standi and misjoinder of parties culminating into the office of the DPP and DCI being condemned unheard of.

As far as we are concerned, Kubenea is neither the owner nor the employee of Clouds Television so whatsoever harm he might have suffered following Bashite storming the TV station, at wee hour, must have been remote.

The question the Civil prosecutors will never be able to answer to the full satisfaction of a superior court is why Clouds TV owners and employees are not part of the criminal matter? The absence of a complaint from TV owners or their staff is a prima facie evidence that there is no criminal matter before a court of law, according to law.

Even if the Magistrates Court want to proceed with the matter in public interest what kind of prayers are the plaintiffs seeking from the court against the Defendant? Sentencing him for what seeing that the whole caboodle falls squarely on civil litigation because primary victims have refused to lodge a criminal complaint. In an analogous scenario, as serious as statutory rape is a felony but if the accuser is unwilling to proceed with the criminal indictment the police have no option but to close the file. This is not murder where a victim is presented with no choice compelling the police to seize of the matter regardless of other players' views. The rights of the deceased are paramount in such situations but as we have already made a finding this matter does not fall there.

It was wrong for the court to allow the criminal hearing of such magnitude which has failed to pass the litmus test in two frontiers: locus standi and a proof that the DPP and DCI have refused to pursue the matter without credible reasons.

Kubenea, did he ever produce an RB to prove his allegation that the DCI has refused to investigate the criminal complaint? Even if the said offices opted not to have moved ahead with the issue there could be many reasons why the police were either unable or were disabled by the principal victims from doing so. For instance, primary victims might have indicated to the police that they have no interest in the matter or there is insufficient evidence to proceed. It is imperative to say politicians are very good at stirring issues of insignificant public value just to keep their fledgling political career afloat and relevant notwithstanding the costs they dictate and impose upon their hapless victims.

Even if someone had lodged a complaint and had secured an RB was that complainant named Said Kubenea? Assuming it was why is he not prosecuting the offices of DCI and DPP through the AG, as well, for overt dereliction of a solemn public duty? Failure to do that amounts to misjoinder of the accused. The AG is entitled to 90 days notice under the law which the private prosecutors have trampled, and the trial court by admitting this malicious prosecution, the court is unintentionally condoning the violations of clear terms of the law involving public entities.

We still feel the court needs to address these issues which are preliminary in nature and both the DCI and DPP should not be condemned in absentia.

Since a lower court is misbehaving there is an urgency of the High Court Judge to intervene through orders of revision.

It is a maze of legal technicalities demanding full investigation before the matter proceed to a full hearing we must caution.


OUR TAKE

Said Kubenea was arrested and presented in a court of law accused of various misdemeanours after he was apprehended somewhere in Arusha following his Nairobi, Kenya rendezvous. We remember seeing him shedding plenty of crocodile tears, alleging he was a victim of police overreach because he was a luminary member of the opposition during electioneering season.

This was and still is a legitimate case of malicious prosecution which Kubenea was a primary victim. Our concern is why is he not pursuing this case which his suffering is direct, and has no remote markings?

Are we missing something or are we reading too much?
 
Rutashubanyuma said:
As much as there is no love lost with Bashite, but the truth needs to be shouted out that he has no case to answer.

Our Magistrates did not go to schools when schools were really schools.

This Kubenea prosecution has no basis in law, at all. The seminal issue the Magistrates Court out to have resolved is the issue of locus standi.

As far as we are concerned, Kubenea is neither the owner nor the employee of Clouds Television so whatsoever harm he might have suffered following Bashite storming the TV station, at wee hour, must have been remote.

The question the Civil prosecutors will never be able to answer to the full satisfaction of a superior court is why Clouds TV owners and employees are not part of the criminal matter?

Even if the Magistrates Court want to proceed with the matter in public interest what kind of prayers are the plaintiffs seeking from the court against the Defendant?

It was wrong for the court to allow the criminal hearing of such magnitude which has failed to pass the litmus test in two frontiers: locus standi and a proof that the DPP and DCI have refused to pursue the matter.

Kubenea did he ever produce an RB to prove his allegation that the DCi has refused to investigate the criminal complaint.

Even if someone had lodged a complaint and had secured an RB was that name was of Said Kubenea?

We still feel the court needs to address these issues which are preliminary in nature and both the DCI and DPP should not be condemned in absentia.

It is a maze of legal technicalities demanding full investigation before the matter proceed to a full hearing we must caution.
View attachment 2031913
Click to expand...
i don't locus standi is a big issue in criminal procedure Laws ...
 
Rutashubanyuma said:
As much as there is no love lost with Bashite, but the truth needs to be shouted out that he has no case to answer.

Our Magistrates did not go to schools when schools were really schools.

This Kubenea prosecution has no basis in law, at all. The seminal issues the Magistrates Court ought to have resolved are;- locus standi and misjoinder of parties culminating into the office of the DPP and DCI being condemned unheard of.

As far as we are concerned, Kubenea is neither the owner nor the employee of Clouds Television so whatsoever harm he might have suffered following Bashite storming the TV station, at wee hour, must have been remote.

The question the Civil prosecutors will never be able to answer to the full satisfaction of a superior court is why Clouds TV owners and employees are not part of the criminal matter? The absence of a complaint from TV owners or their staff is a prima facie evidence that there is no criminal matter before a court of law, according to law.

Even if the Magistrates Court want to proceed with the matter in public interest what kind of prayers are the plaintiffs seeking from the court against the Defendant? Sentencing him for what seeing that the whole caboodle falls squarely on civil litigation because primary victims have refused to lodge a criminal complaint. In an analogous scenario, as serious as statutory rape is a felony but if the accuser is unwilling to proceed with the criminal indictment the police have no option but to close the file. This is not murder where a victim is presented with no choice compelling the police to seize of the matter regardless of other players' views. The rights of the deceased are paramount in such situations but as we have already made a finding this matter does not fall there.

It was wrong for the court to allow the criminal hearing of such magnitude which has failed to pass the litmus test in two frontiers: locus standi and a proof that the DPP and DCI have refused to pursue the matter without credible reasons.

Kubenea, did he ever produce an RB to prove his allegation that the DCI has refused to investigate the criminal complaint? Even if the said offices opted not to have moved ahead with the issue there could be many reasons why the police were either unable or were disabled by the principal victims from doing so. For instance, primary victims might have indicated to the police that they have no interest in the matter or there is insufficient evidence to proceed. It is imperative to say politicians are very good at stirring issues of insignificant public value just to keep their fledgling political career afloat and relevant notwithstanding the costs they dictate and impose upon their hapless victims.

Even if someone had lodged a complaint and had secured an RB was that complainant named Said Kubenea? Assuming it was why is he not prosecuting the offices of DCI and DPP through the AG, as well, for overt dereliction of a solemn public duty? Failure to do that amounts to misjoinder of the accused. The AG is entitled to 90 days notice under the law which the private prosecutors have trampled, and the trial court by admitting this malicious prosecution, the court is unintentionally condoning the violations of clear terms of the law involving public entities.

We still feel the court needs to address these issues which are preliminary in nature and both the DCI and DPP should not be condemned in absentia.

Since a lower court is misbehaving there is an urgency of the High Court Judge to intervene through orders of revision.

It is a maze of legal technicalities demanding full investigation before the matter proceed to a full hearing we must caution.


OUR TAKE

Said Kubenea was arrested and presented in a court of law accused of various misdemeanours after he was apprehended somewhere in Arusha following his Nairobi, Kenya rendezvous. We remember seeing him shedding plenty of crocodile tears, alleging he was a victim of police overreach because he was a luminary member of the opposition during electioneering season.

This was and still is a legitimate case of malicious prosecution which Kubenea was a primary victim. Our concern is why is he not pursuing this case which his suffering is direct, and has no remote markings?

Are we missing something or are we reading too much?
View attachment 2031913
Click to expand...
Mr. Ruta, I don't think if the issue of locus standi is necessary in criminal law. What matters in criminal law is the reasonable & probable cause that the offence has been committed by a person. In this regard, you may lodge a complaint before the court of law having the competent jurisdiction to entertain the matter as provided under Section 128 (2) & (3) of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Regarding the issue of Kubenea, I wish to submit that there is a probable and reasonable cause that the offence had been committed by Paul Makonda. If you broadly interpret the words of Section 128 (2) of the same Act, you gonna comprehend that any person may file a complaint before the court of law even if you were not directly suffered by the illegal act of the offender.

Also, what has been allegd to be committed by P.Makonda are within the ambit of the court where the application was filed. I mean it has a jurisdiction to entertain the matter.

What we can discuss now is whether the permission or leave will be granted by the court to Mr. Saed Kubea as a private prosecutor to prosecute the said matter.

In my opinion, since there is a probable and reasonable cause that the offence was committed, so the court will grant the leave accordingly.
 
joshydama said:
Mr. Ruta, I don't think if the issue of locus standi is necessary in criminal law. What matters in criminal law is the reasonable & probable cause that the offence has been committed by a person. In this regard, you may lodge a complaint before the court of law having the competent jurisdiction to entertain the matter as provided under Section 128 (2) & (3) of the Criminal Procedure Act.

Regarding the issue of Kubenea, I wish to submit that there is a probable and reasonable cause that the offence had been committed by Paul Makonda. If you broadly interpret the words of Section 128 (2) of the same Act, you gonna comprehend that any person may file a complaint before the court of law even if you were not directly suffered by the illegal act of the offender.

Also, what has been allegd to be committed by P.Makonda are within the ambit of the court where the application was filed. I mean it has a jurisdiction to entertain the matter.

What we can discuss now is whether the permission or leave will be granted by the court to Mr. Saed Kubea as a private prosecutor to prosecute the said matter.

In my opinion, since there is a probable and reasonable cause that the offence was committed, so the court will grant the leave accordingly.
Click to expand...


The reading of an act of law must be holistic, and your reading and interpretation of only one section of the law in isolation of the whole law has failed to capture the letter, the spirit and the intent of that law.

From many interpretations of the criminal law I am aware of, in all criminal proceedings a complaint must be lodged with the police as a first line of seeking remedial action.
Henceforth, Section 128 of the Act can only be invoked if the police have refused or are unwilling or unable to lodge a criminal complaint before a court of law. And, a trial court must make a concerted effort to know the reasons behind police alleged inaction. That can only happen if the AG is also prosecuted as a Defendant together with the accused. Failure to do that amounts to misjoinder of the accused and the consequences are dire to the extent the court lacks the jurisdiction to entertain that criminal complaint.

This is designed to protect the rights of both sides. Unless that jurisprudence is upheld there will be a leeway to malicious prosecutions and courts of law will be overwhelmed with unfounded prosecutions. The police is there to ensure only credible complaints are brought before a court of law.

Before a private prosecutor is allowed by a court of law to institute criminal proceedings the court must ensure that all criminal remedies have been exhausted and were unsuccessful. Once the police is notified will make a preliminary investigation the court needs to peruse and ascertain the status of the investigation and whether it is not too premature for the courts to interfere with ongoing investigations. Moreover, the police may give reasons why the matter is a non starter. For example, a key witness has refused to testify or the parties have resolved their differences or there is not enough evidence to proceed etc etc. It is superfluous for a court of law to admit private prosecutors to proceed without having the knowledge of what the police have already done. It may be a waste of time, condemning the suspects into a kangaroo court or a charlatan process. Courts of law have a responsibility to ensure justice is not only done but it is seen to be done. If Kubenea never went to the police and lodged a complaint the court ought to tell him they lack the jurisdiction to entertain the matter. If he had lodged a complaint to the police and he felt they were procrastinating or prevaricating to deal with his criminal complaint he needs to sue AG and the suspect together. He cannot cherrypick whom to prosecute
At heart of the Kubenea complaint is that the police have refused to prosecute, and the magistrate court does not even foresee the danger of the police being condemned unheard, and a former public officer being prosecuted without the benefit of the AG legal representation! It is shocking to witness how the magistrate court is abusing the rights of the accused.

Moreover, with an exception of death the court needs to satisfy itself whether the private prosecutors have a locus standi on the matter because parties with direct standi may have opted to settle the matter out of court. A failure to ensure whether the private prosecutors have a locus standi may compromise the rights of the accused and expose him into "double jeopardy". And, a star witness has chosen to exercise her basic rights of remaining mum?

The issue of locus standi in criminal law has been fleshed out in many ways and now it is recognised as "trite law".

In a more specific example, a woman alleges rape and lodges a complaint and the accused is quickly arrested, DNA collected and matched that was sampled from the semen found in the woman private parts.

Before the criminal proceedings begin or they had commenced in earnest but have not yet been concluded, and the parties to the case decide to settle out of court, will there be a jurisdiction of the court to entertain "a private prosecutor" in the same matter involving the same parties without violating the doctrine of "double jeopardy"?

Kubenea is playing politics and the court of law is wrong to consent to being reduced into a playground of political aspirations gone terribly awry.

Section 128 in no way should be parlayed to abuse a judicial process. If the primary victims have refused to pursue the matter neither can Kubenea have legal legs to stand upon, it is that simple.

If someone witness a crime committed the first step is to report it to police who will prepare an RB, without an RB the court of law has no jurisdiction under any law let alone the ruses of the said section 128.

It is imperative that the AG also be sued so that court can hear the police side of story, and since Bashite was a public servant at the time the events were unfolding he has a legal right of being defended by the AG.

If for example the DPP empowered by the law enter into pacts with economic saboteurs and money laundering suspects can a private prosecutor lodge a complaint when the matter has been settled out of court? The answer sadly is in negation.


Since the magistrate court has not observed these maze of legal technicalities the High Court Judge needs to interfere and give proper directions for the purposes and intents of protecting a court of law from being abused as a conduit to advance a political career which is vamoosing to nowhere.

PSX_20211204_214329.jpg
 
How You Can Make a Difference

In an interview in Time Magazine, the great Swiss theologian Karl Barth recounted that he advised young theologians to ‘take your Bible and take your newspaper and read both. But interpret newspapers from your Bible.’
When we read, watch or listen to the news it could be easy to get depressed. It sometimes seems that evil is triumphing over good. The plans of ‘the wicked’ seem to succeed, while others are subject to the ravages of terrorism, war, poverty and injustice.
This is why we desperately need to hear the voice of the Holy Spirit and listen to the word of God. As we study the Scriptures, we see the triumph of good over evil. In each of the passages for today we see that evil will not ultimately triumph. At the end of the day, good wins. Furthermore, in this struggle between good and evil, you can make a difference.
 
Welcome to Mr. Entitlement World. He is setting up conditions for his homecoming party. But who cares whether he returns or not? But the way he is grandstanding leaves us with the impression we owe him something while we do not. In his absence, everything moves at the pace it was supposed to, so why is he making a lot of noise about his coming? He left in a huff after consulting foreign dignitaries but he never saw the wisdom to seek our advice. He trusted aliens to protect him but now for reasons best known to himself he is imposing conditionalities to us who have no role to his decision to vamoose without lucid justification. Moreover, he is nursing convenient amnesia: when he returned from overseas treatment following his survival from gun wounds, he did not set conditionalities because he was drooling for the presidency. But now there is no such prize to bring him home so he is looking for political relevance which is difficult to secure when the nation has no issue to torment it like in those were the days of Mwendazake.

This is a self imposed exile cum extradition. During campaigns, he made a name for himself by daring authorities to flout elections but after elections we saw his soft underbelly when he succumbed to a psychological warfare. It took a number of mysterious phone calls to convince him his life was on fireline, he rushed to colonial masters begging them to protect him, and later sought a refugee status in those countries confirming our worst fears that our rudimentary opposition operates at the behest of colonial masters. They are gunning down power to serve interests of their chief sponsors. Majority of voters seem unaware of how subservient they are. When they are arraigned in a court of law for felonies they have committed it is the western embassies that are quick to console them sympathizing with their selfish cause.

From swashbuckling with "thubutu kuliondoa jina langu hapatakalika" to "siwezi kupuuzia ujumbe huu wa simu kutoka kwa wasamaria wema wa idara ya usalama..." summarises the character of this opposition luminary.

It is all talk but no action.

Of note:-

Of all the countries opposition self exiles love to run to happens to be western countries. If they happen to go to African countries they use them as stopovers but not point of destination. That should tell us a lot. That they love easy life, and are not what they claim to be.


PSX_20211209_225311.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar Discussions

Back
Top Bottom
Forums
New posts
Post thread
Back