Katiba ni sheria mama hivyo huwezi kutumia sheria za kawaida zinazopitishwa na wabunge kwa maana ya simple majority ya wabunge waliokamilisha koram ya siku hiyo ili kurekebisha sheria ambayo ilipitishwa kwa theluthi mbili ya wabunge kwa kila sehemu ya Muungano. Nimepitia jinsi Kenya walivyorekebisha katiba yao nikaelimika ya kuwa wao kwanza walikuja na muswada wa marekebisho ya katiba yao na kuweka vifungu vya kuupa utaratibu wao wa uwazi na ukweli kwa maana shirikishi nguvu kisheria ambao ulitoa mamlaka ya kuanzisha sheria za kuirekebisha katiba. Zaidi ya theluthi mbili ya wabunge walipiga kura ya kuvikubali hivyo vifungu vya kikatiba na hivyo baada ya kuifanyia marekebisho katiba yao waliweza kuunda sheria za kuunga mkono marekebisho tajwa ya kikatiba. Sisi tumetanguliza mkokoteni kabla ya farasi kwa maana ya kuunda sheria za kawaida kabla ya kuirekebisha sheria mama yaani katiba iliyopo ili kutoa mwanya wa hizo sheria tulizozipitisha kuirekebisha katiba ziwe hazikiuki utaratibu wa kikatiba wa kuirekebisha katiba tajwa. Matokeo yake sheria za marekebisho ya katiba zinapingana na muhimili wa kikatiba na ndiyo maana mchakato wake unaonekana ni batili kwa sababu haujatajwa ndani ya katiba iliyopo, hauna ushirikishi na unalenga kuzima kiu ya mabadiliko ya kweli ya kikatiba. Tusisahau JK and Co are mere turncoats..............si ccm manifesto au hata ngonjera za JK wakati wa kutuomba kipindi cha pili waliaahidi katiba mpya..................kwa hiyo hivi sasa wanaharakisha ili kuzima kiu ya kweli kwa kutuletea hili igizo la tasnia ya filamu babaishi......... Wengi ya wanaopinga sheria hii ya marekebisho ya katiba wamejikita zaidi katika kukosoa baadhi ya vifungu vyake wakati ulaini wa kufanya hivyo ni kuangalia katiba iliyopo mbona haitoi fursa za marekebisho tajwa kwa kuhusisha vyombo nje ya Bunge la Jamhuri ya Muungano? Mfano tu, uhalali wa hiyo tume kikatiba unatoka wapi? Haijatajwa ndani ya katiba iliyopo sasa inapata wapi uhalali wa kukusanya maoni ya kurekebisha katiba iliyopo? Ilipaswa kwanza katiba iliyopo itoe uhalali wa utaratibu huu mpya wa kutumia tume na hata hayo mabunge mawili katika kuipitisha katiba tajwa baada ya kufanyiwa marekebisho ambayo yataungwa mkono na theluthi mbili za wabunge wa pande mbili za Muungano. Haya hayajafanyika kwa sababu JK na wababaishi wenzie wanajua kabisa ndani ya nafsi zao ya kwamba hawana uhalali bungeni wa kupitisha utaratibu walioutumia kwa maana hawawezi kupata kuungwa mkono na theluthi mbili za wabunge na hivyo wakatafuta njia ya mkato ya kuanzisha mchakato wa kurekebisha katiba iliyopo bila ya kuzingatia katiba yetu imeweka utaratibu upi wa kuirekebisha na kwa kufanya vinginevyo wakawa wamekuja na sheria tajwa ambayo inakinzana na katiba iliyopo................huu ni ukiukwaji wa katiba iliyopo............ Katiba iliyopo inatoa mwanya wa Bunge la Jamhuri ya Muungano wa tanzania kurekebisha katiba iliyopo lakini tume, mabunge ya pande mbili za Muungano na hata kura ya maoni tajwa havijatajwa......... Nionavyo JK na vyama vya upinzani wanafikiri ya kuwa.................the ends can justify the means.........and vice versa......."they are dead wrong"..............well keeping the politics involved at bay I can confidently argue that this constitutional process is futile abinitio..........................badilisha katika katiba iliyopo vifungu kwanza ili ujipe mamlaka ya kuirekebisha katiba iliyopo..........acheni kutafuta njia za mkato tena za panya buku kuirekebisha katiba iliyopo...................mwishowe suala hili itabidi lifike mahakama kuu ili iamue kama kweli Bunge lina uwezo wa kikatiba wa kuunda sheria za kawaida tu.........ambazo zahitaji simple majority ya wabunge waliohudhuria kikao kile ili mradi koram tu itimie na kupitisha sheria ya kuinyambulisha katiba iliyopo ambayo ilipitishwa kwa theluthi mbili ya wabunge wa Jamhuri ya Muungano wa Tanzania kama siyo ukiukwaji wa katiba wa wazi kabisa..................?????????????????? Longa maoni yako, pia...............................utusaidie kutafuta sheria bora na ambazo zitahakikishia kila mtanzania maisha bora na wala siyo hizi ngonjera tupu......... ENGLISH VERSION AVAILABLE TOO........ THE HYPOCRISY OF ENACTING A NEW CONSTITUTION. For ccm and president kikwete, it is easier to expose their hypocrisy but with the opposition it is all a different gameplan altogether to do it! Neither did the ccm manifesto of 2010 nor did Kikwete campaign trail of the same year hinted of a political will to rewrite a new constitutional order and panning out of this both CCM and Kikwete are turncoats as far as this constitutional process is concerned. Both CCM and Kikwete embraced a new constitutional process just to stay relevant in our political terrain but have neither the determination nor the political will to bequeath to us a well meaning constitution. But the opposition ranks can easily deceive many if you have been keen at following the ear deafening decibels generated by them. To their credit some opposition parties had garnished a quest for a new constitutional order into their manifesto and made that an election issue, too. After a bungled 2010 election where the real winner of presidential race was flashed out by unjust electoral system well oiled by the government in power through NEC (a national electoral body carefully handpicked by an incumbent president to do him a favour and announce him as a president –elect) and TISS ( an intelligence national body that is notorious at rigging all our post-one party elections since 1995), the opposition went berserk demanding a new constitutional order that will assure them people's power that was perceived stolen from them by the treacherous electoral terrain. On their part, ccm through ministerial outbursts the impression we were getting was that the effort to rewrite the constitution was too costly and an exercise in futility. But ccm; seeing that it was getting the scissors whether from the streets or from the vociferous media waves, decided to cave in, in a manner that will protect the interests of the status quo ante. First ccm avoided to follow the law where in the hitherto constitution only the house has the power to effect the changes it deems fit. The problem for ccm were multifarious in many fronts: First almost one third of members of the House belong to the opposition bench and a number of young ccm MPs who refuse to kowtow the established party position is growing in line with the public opinion. Under this new political complexion, ccm mandarins felt insecure to follow the constitution in enacting the law that will guide the whole constitutional changing process. According to Rev. Mtikila v. Attorney General Case urging for independent candidates, the full bench of the Appeals court made it clear that it is only the House that has the legal power to change the constitution and if the process clearly laid down in the constitution was not followed the courts could be called to interfere and rectify the illegalities. But now ccm led constitutional process has defied the highest court of the land when it embarked to enact an act of parliament that has vitiated the constitutional onus of the House to rewrite the constitution! Out of this, unconstitutional creatures such as the presidential commission empowered to collate constitutional views, two Houses of Isles and of the United Republic of Tanzania let alone referendum leeway were enacted to confuse the electorate that we are on the right track to deliver a new order while the concomitant order was only being hacked to receive a cosmetic facelift. Parliament has no powers to incorporate or delegate her constitutional authority in the existing constitution and by extension cannot seek solace via a simple majority voting process to revoke what the House has enacted in the constitution through a two third majority. The solution to this archaic encroachment to the existing constitution under frivolous excuses that the ends can justify the means is out right wrong and we ought to ask the constitutional court to rectify these colossal anomalies via court injunctions pending a final determination of the main constitutional dispute.