Ni uhaini - as simple as that!

 
Mzee Mwanakijiji naomba niwasilishe tena, kwa kumbukumbu yako, huu uchambuzi:

Where is Zanzibar's death certificate?
Any mortal life is bounded by two significant events: birth and death. No wonder birth and death certificates are so central in ascertaining the status of mortal entities. They tell us when and how such entities came, or ceased, to exist.

As the debate on the status of Zanzibar rages on, it is imperative to revisit at least three birth certificates. It is also imperative to revisit at least two death certificates.

Arguably, Zanzibar's birth certificate is the then ‘Constitutional Government and the Rule of Law Decree, 1964'. I say arguably because as a city-state, Zanzibar existed way before Sultan Seyyid Said of Oman shifted his capital from Muscat to Zanzibar in 1832. I also say so because prior to the revolution there was an ‘Act to Declare the Constitution of the State of Zanzibar'.

Accordingly, this birth certificate stated that the "People's Republic of Zanzibar is a Democratic State dedicated to the rule of law." While all this certification was happening another birth certificate was in the making. This is what the former President of Zanzibar and Vice-President of Tanzania, Alhaj Aboud Jumbe, was to later term the birth certificate of the union.

According to Professor Issa Shivji's book ‘Pan-Africanism or Pragmatism? Lesson of Tanganyika – Zanzibar Union', here Alhaj Jumbe was referring to the ‘Articles of Union between the Republic of Tanganyika and the People's Republic of Zanzibar'. Shivji notes that these Articles were co-drafted in great secrecy by Mwalimu Julius Nyerere's expatriate legal officers and "there was no legal advisor involved on the side of Zanzibar."

Curiously, there is no concrete evidence that the Revolutionary Council of the People's Republic of Zanzibar ever ratified Tanzania's birth certificate in accordance with the power invested in it by Zanzibar's birth certificate. But the Tanganyika Parliament did so. In other words, it certified the death of Tanganyika as a state, nation-state, government, country, republic and so forth.

Could it be that this birth certification amounted to the death certification of Zanzibar as a state, nation-state, government, country, republic and so forth? Nay. Why? Because Zanzibar did not forfeit all the sovereignty invested in its birth certificate. It simply became semi-autonomous.

Contradictorily, many years later when fiery parliamentarians known as the G55 almost annulled the death certificate of Tanganyika, Mwalimu Nyerere responded by asserting that Zanzibar exercises shared sovereignty yet it has surrendered sovereignty. In the introduction to his book ‘Our Leadership and the Destiny of Tanzania', he affirmed that "two independent African states surrendered their sovereignty to one New Country – the United Republic of Tanzania."

Candidly, Mwalimu Nyerere went on to state that this "was true of Tanganyika, which reserved no autonomy, so that from then onwards it neither has nor has had any separate government." However, he set the tone for the current contentions when he also said that this "is equally true of Zanzibar, which does have a separate government with power to deal with all matters relating to Zanzibar which were not (then or since) transferred to the Union Government."

Concerning other matters, he thus stated: "Over the surrendered matters it has no direct control whatsoever; it exercises the shared sovereignty through being part of the United Republic of Tanzania and its representation in the Union Parliament and Government in accordance with the Union Constitution." In other words, Zanzibar did not surrender all its sovereignty.

Constitutionally speaking, we might be missing the mark by treating the Articles of Union or the Acts of Union as the Constitution of the United Republic of Tanzania. In fact, as Shivji affirms in ‘The Legal Foundations of the Union in Tanzania's Union and Zanzibar Constitutions', these agreements have the status of a constitution in their own right because they constituted the union.

Consequently, as he further contends, the union parliament has no power to alter the list of union matters in the International Agreement between Tanganyika and Zanzibar. But, ironically, it has been doing so in such a way that curtails the non-shared sovereignty of Zanzibar.

As Shivji further notes in ‘Pan-Africanism or Pragmatism?' the union parliament managed to bypass the scheme of distribution of powers between the Union and Zanzibar by appending the list of union matters to the Interim Constitution of 1965 as a schedule. Since then "the practice developed that the Union parliament increased the list by amending the schedule without reference to the Articles of Union."

Apart from skewing the distribution of power, this practice also skews the distribution of resources. It is not surprising then that Zanzibar's Minister responsible Natural Resources asserts that "any oil extracted in Zanzibar would not be shared with the mainland" and claims that he "don't understand anything concerning the distribution of natural gas that has been discovered and is accruing revenue in Tanzania mainland" (The Citizen 18/07/08).

At the end of the day we are left with a lot of union grievances that have to do with expanding the list of union matters to 22 from the original 11. As we can see, it is the union and non-union matters relating to financial and natural resources that elicits most of these grievances.

All along we have attempted to shelve our grievances. We did so by pre-empting Alhaj Jumbe in a seemingly move to lodge a case in the Constitutional Court. We have also done so by stalling the Zanzibar Accord. If we go on like this, alas, we will be inflicted by a serious resource curse!

After all Mwalimu Nyerere was correct when he said all these grievances are symptoms of our societal problems such as corruption. His advice is as valid today: "The vast majority – in both parts of the Union – are saying, in effect: Deal with the present problems – and sort them out"!

© Chambi Chachage
 
 
Hali kadhalika kwa hisani yako, Mzee Mwanakijiji, naomba nikurejeshe pia kwenye uchambuzi huu:

BEYOND TWO GOVERNMENTS IN TANZANIA


It is indeed a hot seat. They say it was especially set up for someone who never sat, nay, stood, on it. Indeed little did the current Prime Minister know, then, that he will be its first victim.

Of course I am talking of the impromptu questions and answers' parliamentary sessions with the PM on Thursdays. Many a times the Premier has come out of them unscathed. But there is one particular matter that tends to put him on the spot: ‘The Zanzibar Question.'

Not so long ago the PM ignited a national debate when he seemed to claim that ‘Zanzibar is not a country.' This time around, in his usual frankness, he has expressed a controversial wish. ‘God willing', said he, ‘I would like to see Tanzania run by a single government instead of two.'

Expectedly, this statement has sparked yet another national debate on ‘The Union Question'. "Several Zanzibar politicians", noted The Citizen of 1 August 2009, "denounced Prime Minister Mizengo Pinda's remark." One of them even insisted that the PM should withdraw his statement.

In an interview with BBC Africa, Prof. Abdallah Safari observed how reluctant we have been in dealing squarely with genuine grievances particularly in regard to Zanzibar's identity and autonomy. It is this tendency to beat around the bush that renders ‘Kero the Muungano', that is, ‘Union Grievances', a never ending issue. It's about time now that we take the bull by its horns.

But where do we start? With the vision(s) that informed the founding fathers of the Union, that is, Mwalimu Julius Kambarage Nyerere and Sheikh Abeid Amani Karume? Or, by way of referenda, should we go to the people of the then Tanganyika and Zanzibar, that is, Tanzanians?

If we start with the former then we have to understand what end was justified by the means in which the ‘Articles of Union between the Republic of Tanganyika and the People's Republic of Zanzibar' were signed in 1964. Surely the quest for African Unity or Pan-Africanism was a motivating factor. But, in an ulterior sense, it was not the primary one.

To Karume, as Prof. B. P. Srivastava notes in ‘The Constitution of the United Republic of Tanzania 1977–Some Salient Features-Some Riddles', the Union was mainly "motivated by the instinct of political self-preservation" as it brought strength to Zanzibar and protected them from external enemies of the Revolution.

In the case of Nyerere who had then just survived an army mutiny, the Union was mostly motivated by the need to protect Tanganyika from an impending Communist threat in its doorstep. Way back before independence he was quoted as saying that Zanzibar is "very vulnerable to outside influences" and thus confessed: "I fear it will be a big headache for me."

Many years later he admitted that the "Act of Union" was "an emergency act." It is not surprising then that this is the same Nyerere who became a fiery critic of those Members of Parliament, famously known as G55, who came up with a resolution, demanding a government of Tanganyika. What he wrote afterwards can help us move beyond the current Union structure.

In his book on ‘Our Leadership and the Destiny of Tanzania', Nyerere affirms that we could have adopted a merger with one government or a federation with three governments. "But", he insists, "we felt unable to do so because of the small size of Zanzibar relative to that of Tanganyika." The latter setup, he asserts, "would have been too costly for Tanganyika" But why? Because it "would contribute the vast bulk of the costs for running" it on top of its own.

Why then didn't we opt for what the current PM wish? Nyerere's answer is as significant today as it was then: "A Union with One Government would give the impression that Tanganyika had swallowed up Zanzibar. We had been fighting for the Independence and Unity of Africa; we did not want it to be thought, even erroneously, that we were introducing a new form of imperialism."

He thus concludes his answer: "For that reason I opposed a One Government structure." Surely the PM who happened to be a protégé of Nyerere could have not missed that. Who then inspired his wish for a one government? Ironically, it must be this same mentor of his. To Nyerere, a one government setup remained an option. But a three-government setup was always a nonstarter.

Thus Nyerere's poetic book ‘Tanzania! Tanzania!' is primarily a passionate argument about why the Union will collapse if we form a federation with three governments. Therein he insists that if we really have to change it then let us change it to a one government Union. This might have been the ultimate goal that he had in mind all along.

It may be true that "the founder of the Union", as Dr. Sengondo Mvungi recalls in The Citizen cited above, "had said that the two governments was merely a transitional stage toward a single government." But why then have we witnessed a lot of high level reservations over the years toward the increase of Union matters in the Constitution of the United Republic of Tanzania?

Indeed those matters have constitutionally doubled from the original 11 in the Articles of Union. To make matters worse, as Prof. Abdul Sherrif and Ismail Jussa observes in their chapter on ‘One Step Forward, Two Steps Backwards: The State of Constitutionalism in Zanzibar-2007', out of the 17 areas covered by the East Africa Community Treaty only 4 are Union matters!

In that regard the other 13 areas fall within the jurisdiction of the revolutionary government. Yet its representation in the fast-tracking of the East African Federation is as ambiguous. No wonder, as the two authors note, "a question that was raised repeatedly by the people of Zanzibar during the Wangwe Commission public hearings was one related to the fact that the Union government had assumed powers that are exclusively under the jurisdiction of the Zanzibar government."

If we don't deal squarely with these reservations they will surely pile up and explode. Perhaps in the spirit of the Nyalali Commission there is a need to hold a referendum. What do people want?


© Chambi Chachage: Published in The Citizen and Pambazuka News
 
 
 
 
Bahati mbaya tuliyonayo kama nchi kwa sasa ni ile hali ya kutokuwa na viongozi jasiri katika kusimamia katiba na sheria mbalimbali za nchi ndio maana kila mtu anajifanyia anavyotaka. Sheria ziko wazi kwanini hazifuatwi? Mwanakijiji anaposema ni uhaini ni kutokana na tafsiri kwamba kila anayechezea katiba ni mhaini.
Kama kuna busara na haja ya kujitoa katika muungano taratibu zifuatwe, hatupendi ndoa zivunjike lakini inapokuwa lazima na pengine kwa sababu za usalama wa wahusika kwa shingo upande huwa tunakubali uvunjifu huu wa ndoa. Hivyo taratibu zifuatwe na muungano uvunjwe muda wa kufanya impact asessment ya kitendo hiki utapatikana ndipo hapo wa mbichi na wa mbivu atakapojulikana.
 
 
 
 
Jeshi, Mamlaka ya viwanja vya ndege na bandari, mambo ya ndani, pesa na diplomasia ni mambo ya muungano. Kuutengua muungano ni kukataa mabo ya msingi na kuendekeza ya kijinga. Ni dalili ya kufilisika kisera. Zipo changamoto nyingi za kimaendeleo. Mwanasiasa wetu wanarudi nyuma badala ya kusonga mbele.
 
 
Junius,
Mkuu wangu sina matatizo kabisa na Wazanzibar yaani wananchi wanaojivunia Uzanzibar wao kwani ndivyo Muungano ulivyoundwa kuwawezesha kufanya hivyo. Na hakika mimi siku zote nimekuwa upande wa Wazanzibar ktk swala la Muungano kwa kuitazama Zanzibar kama ni Mbia wa Jamhuri ya Muungano kiasi kwamba nimewahi kuhoji mara nyingi kwa nini Zanzibar sio nchi ikiwa tunaheshimu Muungano wa nchi mbili kuwa moja. Na katika maelezo yangu nimenukuu pia maelezo yanayohusiana na kuifanya Zanzibar kutomezwa na Bara ndio maana wakafikia kuunda serikali mbili. Huwezi kusema tuna serikali mbili lakini hapo hapo ukadai tuna nchi moja. Sasa hizo serikali ni chombo kinachosimamia kitu gani?

Mimi nilimwelewa sana Mwalimu, Karume pamoja na watu woote walioshiriki kuunda serikali ya Muungano wakizingatia nafasi ya Zanzibar ktk Muungano huo. Na hakika Wazanzibar wamekuwa huru sana kulinganisha na nchi nyingi duniani zilizopo ktk Muungano kuweza kudumisha jina na asili ya nchi yao kama vile Quebec ndani ya Muungano wa Canada kwa jinsi wanavyo fanana. Ingawaje mfumo mzima unawachanganya wasomi wakiona kama vile inasomeka 1+1=3 lakini Muungano wetu umeunda kutokana na Mazingira yetu na sio kufuata ya UK, Canada au Marekani kwani nao wote Miungano yao haifanani..

Tatizo langu linakuja pale wanasiasa wanapojaribu kuondoa haki ya Wazanzibar ktk muungano huu na kuwajaza ujinga unaweza kuiweka Zanzibar kama nchi kumezwa na Bara. Naomba sana unielewe hapo!

Most Zanzibarian mnashindwa kutenganisha matakwa yya viongozi kwa maslahi yao na matakwa ya wananchi ndani au nje ya Muungano kwa faida ya Wazanzibar. Ndio nikasema kama kweli hawa viongozi wanataka kuuvunja Muungano kwa nini hata siku moja wameshindwa kuingiza muswada unalenga kuuvunja Muungano? hata iwe ktk record ya muswada ulokataliwa kujadiliwa na bunge kwani kwa mara ya mwisho nachokumbuka ni Bara walioomba kuundwa kwa serikali tatu, na matokeo yake ndio kina Malecela na Jumbe wakaingia hatiani.. bado hoja ilikuwa kuunda serikali ya tatu ndani ya Muungano pasipo kuzingatia kwamba kinachoepukwa kuunda serikali ya tatu ni kumezwa Zanzibar na Bara - kama zinavyomezwa nchi nyinginezo ndani ya muungano wa aina hii.

Na hakika matatizo ya Zanzibar kiuchumi au kijamii hayatokani na Bara isipokuwa ni mfumo tegemezi wa kiutawala, tukitegemea sana misaada ya grants - sawa na masikini waliopangana msikiti Ijumaa wakitazama position ya mtu kuweza kupokea sadaka kiurahisi kuliko njia bora za kuwawezesha Wazanzibar kuinua hali zao za kimaisha. Kwa kila wanachoomba hawa viongozi wenu ni ktk kuwaweka wao ktk position ya kupata fursa ya kuwa mstari wa mbele inapofikia kuomba misaada na grants.

Mkuu wangu I will be very frank with U.. kwenye misaada na grants ndiko kwenye ulaji kwa viongozi. Fedha nyingi za Aid na grants kwa nchi maskini hasa zetu (ktk kuboresha miundombinu) ndio zimeibiwa na viongozi wetu ngazi za juu na hakika baadhi ya viongozi wa Wazaniabr walipigwa bao ktk uchotaji wa fedha hizo na ndio maana wanataka nao kuweka mrija wao kwenye mfuko wa serikali..wanataka nao kuwa mstari wa mbele na kibakuli chao kuomba misaada na kuzipiga kama walivyoweza CCM bara hali hao hao CUF wameshindwa kusimama kukemea wizi na Ufisadi bara na Visiwani (serikali ya Muungano).

Kama kweli wanayo nia hii kama nilivyoizungumza kwa nini serikali ya mapinduzi na CUF wasizungumzie kwamba wao wanachopinga ni kupotea kwa fedha za misaada na grants ambazo wao wanataka kuhakikisha zinawafikia wananchi. na mfumo wa kuhakikisha fedha hizo zinawafikia wananchi utakuwa kadhaa wakadhaa pasipo kuingiza nchi, mipaka ya muungano au nafasi ya viongozi!.

Halafu mkuu unasema ati CUF haiwaungi mkono CCM bara, sijui kama una uhakika maanake kuna wabunge wa CCM tayari wamepitishwa na CUF kiasi kwamba CUF haitasimamisha wagombea maeneno hayo na sii kwa kushirikiana na Chadema au TLP bali CCM. Na hakika najua sababu za CUF kufikia kufanya hivi. Inasikitisha sana kuona kwamba Tanzania kwa ujumla wake bado sisi wote ni WATUMWA wa akili na tupo radhi kumalizana kwa tofauti zilizopikwa majungu.

Hivyo kwa kutumia mfano huu, my point is sii lazima kabisa serikali ya Zanzibar kuwa na wawakilishi wengi ili Zanzibar ipate kuonekana ni nchi.
 
 
..nina hamu sana muungano huu uvunjwe.

..hata ule wa Afrika Mashariki kila nchi imekaa mkao wa kuinyonya na kuidhulumu Tanganyika.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar Discussions

Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…