Mahakama ina uwezo na inatakiwa ihukumu shauri LOLOTE linaloletwa mbele yake, tatizo ni kwamba Mahakama zetu haziko huru kutoka mkono wa executive kwa hiyo kesi nyingi za kisiasa inazikataa kimkakati.Kuna kesi ambayo ilipelekwa mahakamani, mahakama ikasema haiwezi kuhukumu kesi hiyo, kwa sababu ilikuwa ni kesi ya shauri la bunge, na mahakama haitakiwi kuhukumu kesi za mambo ya bunge linavyojiendesha, mahakama ikasema shauri hilo lirudi kumalizwa bungeni.
Nimesahau tu ilikiwa kesi gani.
I suspect kesi hii, kama itasikilizwa, inaweza kusikilizwa kwenye hoja nyinginenyingine tu lakini hii ya kumshitaki Spika mahakamani is a complete non starter.
Huyo Mpina mwenyewe tu, mbunge, ikigundulika alisema uongo bungeni, kapika data, kapakazia watu kwa uongo, ndani ya bunge, kama mbunge, hawezi kushitakiwa na kuhukumiwa mahakamani. Kwa sababu ana parliamentary immunity.
Itakuwa Spika, mkuu wa muhimili wake?
Bunge la Tanzania linaendeshwa kwa katiba ya nchi, spika akiendesha bunge kinyume na katiba ya nchi na kesi ikapelekwa mahakamani mahakama ina uwezo na wajibu wa kusikiliza suala la ukiukwaji wa katiba ya nchi na kutoa maamuzi.Huku si jioni.
Hujaweza kufuatilia hoja yangu.
Nimeandika Spika anaweza kushitakiwa mahakamani. Akimpiga jirani yake anaweza kushitakiwa mahakamani.
Ila, kwenye suala la anavyoendesha Bunge, ukimshitaki Spika mahakamani, mahakama itakataa kusikiliza hiyo kesi na kukwambia Bunge ni muhimili unaojitegemea, Spika anavyoendesha Bunge ni suala la Bungeni, Mahakama haiwezi kuhukumu suala hilo kwa kuangalia separation of powers. Pelwka malalamiko yako Bungeni mkayamalize huko.
Usichoelewa kipi hapo?
Bado hujaelewa, Implication of Judicial Review.Mpina kavunjiwa haki gani?
Mbunge tu, mbunge wa kawaida, achilia mbali Spika, mbunge akiharibu mambo bungeni, akimpakazia mtu uongo, akipika data, akitukana, hawezi kushtakiwa na kuhukumiwa mahakamani. Kwa sababu ana parliamentary immunity.
Sasa unataka kusema Spika ndiyo anaweza kushtakiwa na kuhukumiwa mahakamani kwa shauri la mambo ya anavyoendesha Bunge?
Huelewi kuwa wabunge wote wakiwa Bungeni wana parliamentary immunity, na Spika naye anatetewa na separation of powers asishitakiwe mahakamani kwa jinsi anavyoendesha Bunge kama mkuu wa muhimili?
Moina labda awaburuze hao kina Attorney General na Bashe, lakininkwa Spika alivyomtoa Bungeni, hapo hamna kesi. Mahakama itasema hiki ni beef lenu la Bungeni, kalimalizeni Bungeni.
Spika aki violate immunity ya mbunge bungeni anashitakiwa mahakamani na mahakama ina wajibu wa kutoa hukumu. In a normal functioning democracy Mahakama ndicho chombo cha mwisho kusimamia Law and order.Mfano wako si mzuri kwa sababu umeongelea mtu aliyeanzia kufukuzwa na mamlaka ya chini.
Mfano mzuri ungekuwa mtu aliyeteukiwa na Rais, akatenguliwa na Rais, halafu akataka kwenda Mahakamani kumshitaki Rais kwa sababu Rais kamtengua bila sabahu halali.
Hapa anashitakiwa Spika, mkuu wa muhimili, kwa tuhuma za kumuadhibu Mpina visivyo.
Mahakama haiwezi kuingilia kwa kutoa hukumu kuhusu jinsi Spika (mkuu wa muhimili)anavyoendesha Bunge na kuwajibisha wabunge wala jinsi Rais (mkuu wa muhimili) anavyoteua na kutengua watu serikalini.
Kiranga,Hivi mmesahau Spika katungiwa sheria maalum ya kumlinda dhidi ya mashitaka?
Far and specifically explicitly above the default parliamentary immunity?
Mmesahau mara hii?
Au hii sheria ilibatilishwa?
"On June 10, parliament passed amendments to the Basic Rights and Duties Enforcement Act to restrict public interest lawsuits by limiting the ability of groups to challenge a law or policy that allegedly violates the constitution’s bill of rights. The restriction appeared to be aimed at stopping groups from filing purely public interest litigation without showing harm to an accuser. The amendment also provided broad immunity from civil and criminal cases to top government officials, including the president, vice president, prime minister, speaker, and chief justice."
Hapana,Mahakama ina uwezo na inatakiwa ihukumu shauri LOLOTE linaloletwa mbele yake, tatizo ni kwamba Mahakama zetu haziko huru kutoka mkono wa executive kwa hiyo kesi nyingi za kisiasa inazikataa kimkakati.
Kiranga,Hivi mmesahau Spika katungiwa sheria maalum ya kumlinda dhidi ya mashitaka?
Far and specifically explicitly above the default parliamentary immunity?
Mmesahau mara hii?
Au hii sheria ilibatilishwa?
"On June 10, parliament passed amendments to the Basic Rights and Duties Enforcement Act to restrict public interest lawsuits by limiting the ability of groups to challenge a law or policy that allegedly violates the constitution’s bill of rights. The restriction appeared to be aimed at stopping groups from filing purely public interest litigation without showing harm to an accuser. The amendment also provided broad immunity from civil and criminal cases to top government officials, including the president, vice president, prime minister, speaker, and chief justice."
Mahakama ina uwezo wa kutafsiri sheria, kanuni na taratibu za taasisi yoyote iwe by-laws za serikali ya mtaa, kanuni za bunge au taratibu za serikali kuu, kunapatokea sintofahamu na pande mojawapo ikaona mahakama ndio sehemu iliyobaki ya kupatiwa haki yake basi mahakama ina wajibu mkamilifu kikatiba kuamua hilo shauri.Kwani hatarudi Bungeni? Kafukuzwa milele?
Point yangu ni kwamba Mahakama haiwezi kutoa hukumu kesi ya Spika anavyoendesha Bunge, that is against separation of powers. Mahakama itasema hili ni jambo la Bunge, limalizeni Bungeni.
Unaelewa hilo?
Muhimilinwa Bunge ni kamili katika kujiendesha, haupangiwi na Mahakama unavyojiendesha.
Unaelewa hilo?
Kuna Spika gani Tanzania alishitakiwa mahakamani na kuhukumiwa kwa makosa aliyoyafanya kayikankitekeleza kazi zake za ki Spika Bungeni?Kiranga,
Kindly, jielimishe kwenye Judicial Review and it’s implications.
Unaongelea vitu tofauti, powers of speaker versus decision of speaker.
Decision of any authorities including parliament can be judicially reviewed by High Court.
Tofauti kubwa iliyopo ni majambo mapya yanayo husika katika nchi hizo. Hapa kwetu ni kama tunazungukia kwenye uchafu ule ule unaozalishwa na CCM, na kuufanya uonekane ni mambo mapya. Huko kwingine, mambo mapya mara nyingi ni mambo yenye tija kwa nchi hizo.Nchi yoyote iliyo hai lazima kila siku kuwe na jipya, vinginevyo itakuwa nchi mfu.
Parliamentary immunity ni suala la kikatiba na Mahakama inao uwezo na wajibu kushughulika na jambo lolote la kikatiba. Mahakama zetu mara nyingi huwa haifanyi hivyo kwa sababu za kisiasa tu zinazotokana na kutokuwa huru.Hapana,
Mambo ya jinsi bunge linavyoenda na kanuni zake, maneno yanayosemwa bungeni na wabunge, Spika anavyoendesha Bunge, yote hayo yana parliamentary immunity, hayatolewi hukumu na mahakama.
Na hata kusema "hili suala la kumshtaki Spika kwa jinsi alivyoendesha Bunge ni suala la Bunge, kalimalizeni Bungeni" ni sehemu ya kutafsiri sheria, kanuni na taratibu hizo.Mahakama ina uwezo wa kutafsiri sheria, kanuni na taratibu za taasisi yoyote iwe by-laws za serikali ya mtaa, kanuni za bunge au taratibu za serikali kuu, kunapatokea sintofahamu na pande mojawapo ikaona mahakama ndio sehemu iliyobaki ya kupatiwa haki yake basi mahakama ina wajibu mkamilifu kikatiba kuamua hilo shauri.
Ukifuata utawala wa sheria, mahakama haivunji parliamentary immunity.Parliamentary immunity ni suala la kikatiba na Mahakama inao uwezo na wajibu kushughulika na jambo lolote la kikatiba. Mahakama zetu mara nyingi huwa haifanyi hivyo kwa sababu za kisiasa tu zinazotokana na kutokuwa huru.
Wabunge wa chama ganiShida ni kuwa ana hoja nzuri cha kushangaza wabunge woote kimyaaa!!!!
Hata ingekuwa inatakiwa kuhukumu bado asingefanya lolote.Mahakama haitakiwi kuhukumu kesi ya Spika anavyoendesha Bunge.
That is against separation of powers.
Tusizilaumu mahakama kwa kesi ambazo hazina merit hata ya kusikilizwa.
Vipi spika wa bunge akivunja Parliamentary Immunity? Nani ana wajibu wa kulirejesha bunge kwenye mstari wa sheria?Ukifuata utawala wa sheria, mahakama haivunji parliamentary immunity.
A double whammy.Hata ingekuwa inatakiwa kuhukumu bado asingefanya lolote.
Sasa suala tayari limeshindikana kumalizwa ndani ya bunge, kuna upande mmoja ambao haukubaliani na kumalizwa huko kwa hilo suala na unaona umedhulimiwa haki zake.Na hata kusema "hili suala la kumshtaki Spika kwa jinsi alivyoendesha Bunge ni suala la Bunge, kalimalizeni Bungeni" ni sehemu ya kutafsiri sheria, kanuni na taratibu hizo.
Na kuna precedent ya hili la kurudisha kesi Bungeni. Mahakama ishawahi kufanya hivi, ikifanya tena haitakuwa mara ya kwanza.
Jambo la msingi ni kwamba mahakama haitakiwi kuhukumu shauri la Bunge linavyojiendesha.Sasa suala tayari limeshindikana kumalizwa ndani ya bunge, kuna upande mmoja ambao haukubaliani na kumalizwa huko kwa hilo suala na unaona umedhulimiwa haki zake.