Pre GE2025 Luhaga Mpina amshtaki Spika Tulia na Mwanasheria Mkuu wa Serikali kwa kuondolewa Bungeni kinyume na Sheria

[Zollensky]

But how is parliamentary immunity inconsistent with the constitution? This is an old tradition in Commonwealth countries and Westminster parliaments.

Halafu hata ukivunja parliamentary immunity leo, just to entertain you and rais an immanent critique, how are you applying that retroactively? That is against most logical jurisprudence. Yiu will habe yo apply that going forward and let this incident go.

Unataka kuanzisha sheria inayosema kuvaa mashati ya kijani ni kosa la jinai leo halafu uende kwenye picha kukamata watu wote waliovaa mashati ya kijani kw amwaka mzima uliopita?

How absurd!

It looks like you guys are trying to inbent all kinds of scenarios just to nab the Speaker, against all kinds of principles of law.

You started by trying to break separation of powers.

And now you want to strike laws off the book and invoke that void retroactively?

Bado hujaelewa.

Katiba ni sheria mama, si ndio?

However, Katiba haiwezi kuwa Too Prescriptive, as such it needs other laws to supplement it.

Parliamentary Immunity ipo kwenye Katiba, Lakini pia, kuna sheria nyingine zime prescribe immunity ya parliament, ikiwemo hiyo sheria uliyosema imetungwa majuzi kumuwekea kinga spika asishitakiwe Mahakamani akiwa Bungeni.

If that supplementary law has provisions which are inconsistent with Constitution, Court has power to order for their removal.

 

[Zollensky]

But how is parliamentary immunity inconsistent with the constitution? This is an old tradition in Commonwealth countries and Westminster parliaments.

Halafu hata ukivunja parliamentary immunity leo, just to entertain you and rais an immanent critique, how are you applying that retroactively? That is against most logical jurisprudence. Yiu will habe yo apply that going forward and let this incident go.

Unataka kuanzisha sheria inayosema kuvaa mashati ya kijani ni kosa la jinai leo halafu uende kwenye picha kukamata watu wote waliovaa mashati ya kijani kw amwaka mzima uliopita?

How absurd!

It looks like you guys are trying to inbent all kinds of scenarios just to nab the Speaker, against all kinds of principles of law.

You started by trying to break separation of powers.

And now you want to strike laws off the book and invoke that void retroactively?

As I told you earlier on, in Law to every general rule there’s an exception.

For some reasons, Law can operate retrospectively, eg Public Policy, Public Interest, Security reasons.

Rejea Sheria ya Uhujumu Uchumi, that law operates retrospectively.

 

[Kiranga]

As I told you earlier on, in Law to every general rule there’s an exception.

For some reasons, Law can operate retrospectively, eg Public Policy, Public Interest, Security reasons.

Rejea Sheria ya Uhujumu Uchumi, that law operates retrospectively.

Najua sheria inaweza kua act retroactively. Nimesoma hilo jambo kitambo.

But that is very controversial and frowned upon and I can almost guarantee you it will not happen in this case.

You are just fantasizing.

 

[Zollensky]

Spika kamfukuza Mpina vikao 15 bungeni. Mpina analalamika kaonewa.

Sehemu ya Mpina kumshitaki Spika ni bungeni, si mahakamani.

Bunge lina mpaka mchakato wa kumtoa Spika kwa impeachment na vote of no confidence.

Mahakama haiingilii namna Spika anavyoendesha Bunge.

Kwanza Spika ana sheria ya kinga dhidi ya kushitakiwa mahakamani. Unamshitakije?

umesema Mpina sehemu ya kushitaki ni Bungeni baada ya kuonewa.

Unaelewa kuna mazingira Maamuzi ya kitolewa ni CONCLUSIVE & FINAL?

The only remedy under law is JUDICIAL REVIEW. And, unfortunately you don’t seem to understand it fullest.

 

[Kiranga]

Bado hujaelewa.

Katiba ni sheria mama, si ndio?

However, Katiba haiwezi kuwa Too Prescriptive, as such it needs other laws to supplement it.

Parliamentary Immunity ipo kwenye Katiba, Lakini pia, kuna sheria nyingine zime prescribe immunity ya parliament, ikiwemo hiyo sheria uliyosema imetungwa majuzi kumuwekea kinga spika asishitakiwe Mahakamani akiwa Bungeni.

If that supplementary law has provisions which are inconsistent with Constitution, Court has power to order for their removal.

I can guarantee it will not be removed as you say.

Do you want to bet money on that?

 

[Zollensky]

Kuwa challeghed on what?

That is a logical non sequitur fallacy.

Kuweza kuwa challenged si kuwa successfully challenged.

Unaruhusiwa kufungua kesi dhidi ya Spika kwa sababu ya alivyoendesha Bunge, hapo umeanzisha challenge. Unataka tafsiri ya sheria kutoka mahakamani.

Mahakama nayo inaruhusiwa kukuambia hili ni shauri la Bunge, mahakama haiingilii Bunge na kuhukumu kesi ya Spika anavyoendesha Bunge. Kapeleke suala lako Bungeni mkalimalize huko huko. Hatutaki kuvunja separation of powers kwa kuingilia kesi za Spika anavyoendesha Bunge.

Huelewi wapi?

Kwanza, huja admit kama spika ni authority.

Pili, una admit admit kuwa challenged, japo hutaki kusema including decisions of speaker.

Tatu, unataja separation of powers bila kutaja checks and balances of powers ( showing only one side of coin?).

Mwisho, Mahakama kufanya marejeo ya maamuzi ya spika kama yalifuata sheria, sio kuingilia Muhimili wa Bunge, in fact, inatoa haki kwa mlalamikaji ikiwa kweli maamuzi ya spika yalikiuka sheria na hivyo kumuathiri Mpina.

Hili nalo huelewi?

 

[Zollensky]

Najua sheria inaweza kua act retroactively. Nimesoma hilo jambo kitambo.

But that is very controversial and frowned upon and I can almost guarantee you it will not happen in this case.

You are just fantasizing.

Unfortunately, Mpina’s saga doesn’t deal with retrospective effect of law. Rather, it deals on challenging decisions of speaker through judicial review.

 

[sengobad]

Mahakama inaweza kutoa hukumu kuhusu uendeshwaji wa mhimili unaojitegemea wa Bunge na Spika?

Hukumu hiyo haitaharibu uhuru wa Bunge kama mhimili unaojitegemea?

Sikiliza shauri lilofunguliwa mkuu

 

[Zollensky]

I can guarantee it will not be removed as you say.

Do you want to bet money on that?

That would be another scenario, Mpina deeply disappointed on how speaker arrived at such decisions ( allegedly silly ones).

 

[Kiranga]

Kwanza, huja admit kama spika ni authority.

Pili, una admit admit kuwa challenged, japo hutaki kusema including decisions of speaker.

Tatu, unataja separation of powers bila kutaja checks and balances of powers ( showing only one side of coin?).

Mwisho, Mahakama kufanya marejeo ya maamuzi ya spika kama yalifuata sheria, sio kuingilia Muhimili wa Bunge, in fact, inatoa haki kwa mlalamikaji ikiwa kweli maamuzi ya spika yalikiuka sheria na hivyo kumuathiri Mpina.

Hili nalo huelewi?

The speaker being an authority, in this case, is immaterial if the court is not allowed to intervene in parliamentary matters.

Decision ya speaker kwenye kuendesha Bunge haiingiliwi na mahakama, Speaker ana parliamentary immunity, ana kingwa na separation of powers, checks and balance yenyewe inam protect speaker hiyo balance katika check and balance maana yake checks zisiwe invasive mpaka kuingilia uendeshaji wa muhimili mwingine.

Mahakama inaweza kufanya rejea na kusema sheria inasema hili ni suala la Bunge, si la mahakama, limalizeni Bungeni. In fact mahakama ilishafanya hivyo kwa kesi ambayo hata haikuwa clearcut kama hii.

Nimekwambia weka precedent ya Commonwealth country/ Westminster parliament ambapo Speakwr amehukumiwa na mahakama kwa suala la alivyoendesha bunge.

Hujaweka mpaka sasa.

 

[zitto junior]

Hata kama matokeo hayatatoka leo ama kesho ama hayatatoka in favor ya Mpina, napenda courage yake, napenda fighting spirit ndani yake. Mpina ana ile kitu inaitwa intestinal and testicular fortitude. Sio mtu wa kukubali kushindwa kirahisi.

Hamna lolote, mbona alipigwa chini NEC taifa na mkoa na hakuna aliyeshtuka. He's a nobody hata 2025 anajua hawezi kurudi so anataka tu kufa na watu. Rai yangu tu chadema isimpokee huyu opportunist maana kipindi tunateswa na JPM alikua kimya leo wamegeukana ndio anataka huruma yetu.

 

[Kiranga]

Unfortunately, Mpina’s saga doesn’t deal with retrospective effect of law. Rather, it deals on challenging decisions of speaker through judicial review.

Lakini wewe ndiye umesema sheria za immunity zinaweza kufutwa, implying that void yake inaweza ku operate retrospectively.

Unachonoa sasa?

 

[Kiranga]

Sikiliza shauri lilofunguliwa mkuu

Nimejikita hususan kwenye shauri la kumshitaki Spika mahakamani.

 

[Kiranga]

That would be another scenario, Mpina deeply disappointed on how speaker arrived at such decisions ( allegedly silly ones).

Unachomoa sasa?

 

[Zollensky]

Sikiliza shauri lilofunguliwa mkuu

A double whammy.

Ila tatizo ninaloliona hapa ni kwamba, mahakama ikikataa kusikiliza kesi ya Spika, kwa sababu za halali za separation of powers, watu watasema mahakama imekataa kwa amri kutoka juu.

Amri kutoka juu sio jambo geni kwa Mahakama zetu.

Hakuna independent judiciary from the word go, Luckily we have rare independent judges whose rulings one can tell how bold and courageous they’re. Tunawajua.

Hivyo, kuna uwezekano tena mkubwa sana wa maagizo kutoka juu kama tu kutimuliwa kwa spika ndugai.

Hata Fatma Karume, at one point, alimuwakilisha Ado Shaibu, kwenye kesi ya kumshitaki John Joseph Pombe Magufuli & Attorney General ( Adelrdus Kilangi) based on allegations appointment of Kilangi as AG was contrary to Constitution as he was TOO JUNIOR hence unqualified for the post.

You want to know outcome of the case?

Fatma Karume was suspended from practice up to date. This is Tanzania!

 

[Zollensky]

N

Unachomoa sasa?

Nimechomeka wapi kwani?

 

[Kiranga]

Amri kutoka juu sio jambo geni kwa Mahakama zetu.

Hakuna independent judiciary from the word go, Luckily we have rare independent judges whose rulings one can tell how bold and courageous they’re. Tunawajua.

Hivyo, kuna uwezekano tena mkubwa sana wa maagizo kutoka juu kama tu kutimuliwa kwa spika ndugai.

Hata Fatma Karume, at one point, alimuwakilisha Ado Shaibu, kwenye kesi ya kumshitaki John Joseph Pombe Magufuli & Attorney General ( Adelrdus Kilangi) based on allegations appointment of Kilangi as AG was contrary to Constitution as he was TOO JUNIOR hence unqualified for the post.

You want to know outcome of the case?

Fatma Karume was suspended from practice up to date. This is Tanzania!

Hiyo historia yote naijua.

But it is a logical non sequitur fallacy.

Inawezekana mahakama zikawa zinaweza kuhukumu kwa amri kutoka juu, halafu Mpina akapeleka kesi isiyo na merit ya kusikikizwa.

There is no contradiction there.

Mshaona kesi dhidi ya Spika haina mashiko, sasa mnaanza kujiandaa kisaikolojia kulialia kilio cha "mahakama ya amri kutoka juu"?

Nilitabiri hili.

 

[Zollensky]

N

Unachomoa sasa?

Nimechomeka wapi kwani?

 

[Kiranga]

N

Nimechomeka wapi kwani?

Wewe mwenyewe umeweka hoja ya sheria kufutwa na void ku apply retroactively.

Nikakwambia unataka ku bet hela kwenye hilo? Nakwambia halitatokea.

Unaogopa kusimamia maneno yako.

 

[Zollensky]

Jambo la msingi ni kwamba mahakama haitakiwi kuhukumu shauri la Bunge linavyojiendesha.

Mbunge akiweza kushitaki hata kwa mizimu aende tu.

Judicial Review inasema, unaweza pinga maamuzi ya Mamlaka yeyote ikiwemo Bunge chini ya spika.

Wewe unasema huwezi fanya hivyo? 😂