Nashukuru kwa kupata hukumu hii. kama ndio nakala halisi ya mahakama, kama mwanasheria nimesoma critically facts na issues za judge alizotumia kufikia uamuzi wake. Kisha nimegundua mapungufu yafuatayo-
1. Judge anakiri Kamanda G. Lema hakutamka maneno hayo BINAFSI bali wawakilishi wake, hivyo nilitarajia judge angekuwa na additional issue ya kumtambua nani aliyetamka maneno hayo kwa niaba ya G. Lema; hakuna popote nilipoona anatajwa mtu huyo;
2.Jambo la pili ambalo judge hakulitatua ni kuhusu huyo mtu aliyetamka maneno ya kashfa dhidi ya mgombea wa CCM je alitamka maneno haya kwa kibali na ruhusa ya Kamanda G. Lema,je Lema alijua hayo yamesemwa na akayakubali kwamba hata ingekuwa yeye angefanya hivyo, maswali haya naona bado hayajajibiwa katika hukumu hiyo ya jaji, ndio maana alifikia uamuzi huo
3. Suala jingine ambalo jaji alitakiwa kulitolea tafsiri endapo kosa la jinai alilotenda A anaweza kuhukukumiwa B bila ya kushirikiki katika kosa hilo kufanyika,
4. Maneno mengi yaliyosemwa naona ni alleged defamation ambayo ina taratibu zake na fidia hutolewa pale inapodhibitika, itafaa CDM kuanza mchakato wa kuomba amendments ya kifungu hiki kwani kimejumuisha masuala mengine ambayo yanasimamiwa na sheria zingine na yana utaratibu wake wa fidia. hii itakuwa iliwekwa kwa makusudi na tayari huenda watu wa kutamka ovyo waliandaliwa bila upinzani kujua ili kupata sababu ya kutengua wabunge wa upinzani
Kwa mtizamo wangu haya masuala matatu yakitizamwa kwa upana wake kamanda G. Lema atarejea Bungeni hivi karibuni
CDM waongeze bidii ili kamanda arejee mjengoni kabla ya mjadala wa KATIBA MPYA
mm napita
Ili uweze kumshinda adui yako unapaswa kufahamu uwezo/fikra/mawazo na mbinu zake
Jargon nyingi sana humo hatuwezi kusoma, by the way kwanini mahakama ya Tanzania inatumia kimombo?
Naomba tuweke kwenye katiba mpya KIswahili kitumike, maana kesi inaendeshwa kiswahili hukumu inaandikwa kimombo wakati kuna maneno mengine hayatafsiriki kirahisi.
Mkuu mbona mimi naona jamaa ameconclude kuwa Lema aliyasema hayo maneno mwenyewe au mimi naelewa tofauti?
In the material petition it has been proved satisfactorily that the person of respondent No.1 is the one which physically uttered statements in the scope of paragraph 7(b) of the petition (events Nos.3, 4 and 5) and paragraph 7(d) of the petition (events Nos.7, 8, 9, 10 and 11). It means respondent No.1 uttered during election rallies statements during eight events which were proved satisfactorily. Under that section 108(2) of The Elections Act (supra) any of those events could have sufficed to move this court to declare his election void. On that basis this court is hereby declaring void the election of respondent No.1 Godbless Jonathan Lema as Member of Parliament for Arusha Urban Constituency during the 2010 year General Election
Mimi hoja yangu ni ushahidi ambao ahujatimiza kile sheria inasega:"Prove beyond reasonable doubt". Kulihitajika substantiation ya huu ushahidi kuiridhisha mahakama kwa sababu haikuwepo wakati maneno yanatamkwa iweje wawaamini mashaidi wa upande mmoja na kuwakatalia mashahidi wa upande wapili kwa vigezo ambavyo ni dhaifu. kama ushahidi ungekuwa unatumika hivi basi kila mtu angefugwa maana ni rahisi tu kushirikiana na mashahidi mkatoa ushaidi wa uongo mkamridhisha huyu judge watu wakala chao mambo yakaendelea lakini si hivyo ni lazima anayeshitaki aprove BEYOND REASONABLE DOUBT ndiyo maana kesi nyingine huchukuwa miaka mingi kujiridhisha na ushahidi kabla ya kutoa hukumu.
Naomba kuuliza kwa wale weledi wa mambo ya sheria.
Hii hukumu imeletwa na mleta mada kama doc ambayo imevuja, je kweli imevuja au mtuhumiwa ana haki ya kupewa nakala ya hukumu ? na kama ana haki na amepewa na mahakama sasa imevujia wapi?
mi naona bwana lema alivyo nje ndio moto mkali umeona shinyanga umeona kahama kweli cdm nomanoted thanks
Nashukuru kwa kupata hukumu hii. kama ndio nakala halisi ya mahakama, kama mwanasheria nimesoma critically facts na issues za judge alizotumia kufikia uamuzi wake. Kisha nimegundua mapungufu yafuatayo-
1. Judge anakiri Kamanda G. Lema hakutamka maneno hayo BINAFSI bali wawakilishi wake, hivyo nilitarajia judge angekuwa na additional issue ya kumtambua nani aliyetamka maneno hayo kwa niaba ya G. Lema; hakuna popote nilipoona anatajwa mtu huyo;
2.Jambo la pili ambalo judge hakulitatua ni kuhusu huyo mtu aliyetamka maneno ya kashfa dhidi ya mgombea wa CCM je alitamka maneno haya kwa kibali na ruhusa ya Kamanda G. Lema,je Lema alijua hayo yamesemwa na akayakubali kwamba hata ingekuwa yeye angefanya hivyo, maswali haya naona bado hayajajibiwa katika hukumu hiyo ya jaji, ndio maana alifikia uamuzi huo
3. Suala jingine ambalo jaji alitakiwa kulitolea tafsiri endapo kosa la jinai alilotenda A anaweza kuhukukumiwa B bila ya kushirikiki katika kosa hilo kufanyika,
4. Maneno mengi yaliyosemwa naona ni alleged defamation ambayo ina taratibu zake na fidia hutolewa pale inapodhibitika, itafaa CDM kuanza mchakato wa kuomba amendments ya kifungu hiki kwani kimejumuisha masuala mengine ambayo yanasimamiwa na sheria zingine na yana utaratibu wake wa fidia. hii itakuwa iliwekwa kwa makusudi na tayari huenda watu wa kutamka ovyo waliandaliwa bila upinzani kujua ili kupata sababu ya kutengua wabunge wa upinzani
Kwa mtizamo wangu haya masuala matatu yakitizamwa kwa upana wake kamanda G. Lema atarejea Bungeni hivi karibuni
CDM waongeze bidii ili kamanda arejee mjengoni kabla ya mjadala wa KATIBA MPYA
mm napita
Ili uweze kumshinda adui yako unapaswa kufahamu uwezo/fikra/mawazo na mbinu zake
Hakuna lugha ngumu, acheni utumwa wa lugha. Kwani blog hii ni ya kiingereza? Tukitaka kila mmoja aonyeshe anachojua tutaelewana kweli?Wakuu haka ka-lugha kagumu!
Hivi huyu jaji angekuwepo arumeru mashariki akamsikia Lusinde sijui angesemaje?karibu mambo yote kuhusu Buliani ni kweli kwani hakuwahi kukanusha binafsi wala huyo Laigwanani wake
Kikubwa hapa Timu ya CDM na Lema ilishindwa kutafuta credible witnesses kama wale wa CCM. Refer to
"In a situation like that, this court could have opined that respondent No.1's side rebutted the petitioners' version. But the same is not the position because all the four witnesses who testified for respondent No.1's side had rampant interests to serve, subject to results of this petition due to the following grounds.
First, respondent No.1 who testified as RW.1, was also the CHADEMA political party Elections Campaign Manager for the Arusha Urban Constituency during the 2010 General Elections. He was, in addition, the MP candidate for that constituency under sponsorship of that party. Second is RW.2. She was the candidate for the counsellors' seat for Lemara ward in that constituency.
Third is RW.3 who is currently CHADEMA Publicity Secretary. He was a Master of Ceremonies (MC) during all sixty (60) election campaign meetings for CHADEMA MP candidate in that constituency which respondent No.1 addressed. And fourth is RW.4. He was that political party's Publicity Secretary during the elections campaign period in 2010. He is currently CHADEMA's Arusha Regional Secretary and simultaneously that party's Chief Accountant at its headquarters in Dar es Salaam".
Ikumbukwe kuwa CDM ilikuwa na harakati nyingi sana kwa wakati mmoja kutayarisha mandamnao, migomo masuala ya umeya wa Arusha n.k, Hivyo CCM walitumia muda huu kujipanga vyema tayari kuwashushia CDM kipigo kama amabvyo CDM ilikuwa kiwashushia vipigo katika nyanja nilizozitaja hapo juu.
Pamoja na uzuri wote wa Mhe Lema lakini lazima tuzingatie ukweli, Je kwa hulka yake Lema asingeweza ktamka hizo kauli? Kwangu mimi naona pamoja na ubora wake kiharakati lakini hakuwa ameandaliwa vyema kutambua sheria za uchaguzi. Hivyo hakuna sababu za kulia kulia sana, tugange yajayo.
Mkuu, hatakama alisema wao walipaswa kuthibitisha maneno hayo....Pamoja na uzuri wote wa Mhe Lema lakini lazima tuzingatie ukweli, Je kwa hulka yake Lema asingeweza ktamka hizo kauli? Kwangu mimi naona pamoja na ubora wake kiharakati lakini hakuwa ameandaliwa vyema kutambua sheria za uchaguzi. Hivyo hakuna sababu za kulia kulia sana, tugange yajayo.