Maoni yangu kuhusu Paul Makonda na Kigamboni

[Pauline rogat]

Hiyo sheria kama ni null and void bila Shaka makosa ya natural justice yanaweza kuhukumiwa na sheria iliyotungwa leo.Let us hope so!

 

[The Palm Tree]

UNAANDIKA NADHARIA, WEKA MAJIBU KWA UHALISIA. naamini muandishi amesoma vizuri mabadiliko ya sheria yaliyo fanywa hivi karibuni.

Unataka uhalisia gani wewe?

Ya "Natural principle??"

Kama ni hiyo, Fanya hivi:

Nenda kaibe kwa jirani yako. Kisha wakukamate uone namna kanuni hii inavyotenda kazi yake...

Ni lazima ulipie gharama ya tendo la wizi wako...!

Yaweza kuwa "kupigwa na kumwagiwa petrol/mafuta ya taa mpaka ufe hapohapo" au ukibahatika kusevu kifo cha mawe na moto, basi "tutakukuta Polisi na kisha mahakamani"

Narudia tena: HAKUNA SHERIA YA KULINDA UOVU WA BINADAMU, HAKUNA TENDO OVU LISILO NA MSHAHARA WAKE, HAIPO...HALIPO....!!

Kila OVU ni punishable....

 

[Kipangaspecial]

Ninavyojua ni kwamba sheria iliyotungwa leo haiwezi kuhukumu kitu ambacho jana hakikua kosa.

Hii haiapply hapa?

Chochote kinawezekana, cha msingi acheni ufisadi

 

[Castr]

Chochote kinawezekana, cha msingi acheni ufisadi

Wakina nani tuache ufisadi?

 

[Kipangaspecial]

Wakina nani tuache ufisadi?

Maccm wote

 

[sem2708]

Wana jamvi,

Niseme tu kwamba ninayo yasema hapa ni maoni yangu binafsi naweza kusahihishwa au la, ni kwamba Paul Makonda anaingia kugombea kwenye Jimbo ambalo alikuwepo Aliye wahi kuwa Naibu Waziri wa Afya, je huyo Waziri mstaafu hagombei tena kwa jimbo hilo? Makonda kuonekana kugmbea huko sidhani kama kuna uwezekano wa kukatwa ila Waziri mstaafu ndiye anaweza akakatwa.
Kugombea kwa Paul Makonda kuna weza kunipa dira kuwa anaweza akapita na kuhakikisha anakuwa mbunge ili apewe u spika katika Bunge la Jamhuri yote haya anayatafuta ili na yeye apewe kinga ya kutoshtakiwa endapo kuna madudu na mambo mengine aliwahi kuyafanya akiwa Mkuu wa Mkoa maana wote hawa wakuu wa mihimili tayari wana kinga ya kutoshtakiwa.

Sasa hapa ndio panakuwa pagumu maana kwa lazima anaweza akahakikisha anapita ili apewe kinga.

Wafuasi wa kigogo utawatambua tu. Wamelishwa uzushi na Kigogo

 

[BUSH BIN LADEN]

Kuna kipindi Mabele Malando aligombea uspika na hakuwa mbunge. Hii scenario ya mtu kupitishwa kuwa mbunge ili awe spika inabatilisha uhalali wa hoja ya mleta uzi. Hukufanya utafiti kabla ya kuja na huu uji

 

[Mwamalili]

Kwani alifanya dhambi gani akiwa mkuu wa mkoa? Au ndio yale ya Pompeo?

 

[Castr]

Maccm wote

Kwahiyo na mi fisadi?

 

[Ta Nanka]

Makonda amekuwa overrated sana mpaka inatia kinyaa

Kweli. Nikiazima lugha za mabeberu, ni kama "making a mountain out of a mole hill, for nothing. He is utterly not worth it"

 

[Gia kubwa]

Makonda anawanyima Usingizi sana Mafirauni, Wauza Unga, Wasio na Marinda, Wazee wa Shisha, Wazee wa Kutelekeza Familia nk.
Kijana mwenzako kwanini umchukie badala tuombeane heri maana sote tumeumbwa kwa mfano wa Mungu!
Kila lakheri Baba Keagan.

huyu mbona kama ni Makonda mwenyewe anaongea au? Itapendeza kama jina la Makonda litakatwa itakuwa Sisiem imara sana , hawa kina Makonda ni watu madishi yameyumba na ndio huchafua jina zuri la chama kwa kujifanya miungu watu!!

 

[Jephta2003]

Makonda apewe uspika kwa akili ipi na uzoefu upi?,mzee wa kongwa uzoefu ulimbeba,je huyu ndugu yangu atabebwa na nini?

 

[unprejudiced]

Wana jamvi,

Niseme tu kwamba ninayo yasema hapa ni maoni yangu binafsi naweza kusahihishwa au la, ni kwamba Paul Makonda anaingia kugombea kwenye Jimbo ambalo alikuwepo Aliye wahi kuwa Naibu Waziri wa Afya, je huyo Waziri mstaafu hagombei tena kwa jimbo hilo? Makonda kuonekana kugmbea huko sidhani kama kuna uwezekano wa kukatwa ila Waziri mstaafu ndiye anaweza akakatwa.
Kugombea kwa Paul Makonda kuna weza kunipa dira kuwa anaweza akapita na kuhakikisha anakuwa mbunge ili apewe u spika katika Bunge la Jamhuri yote haya anayatafuta ili na yeye apewe kinga ya kutoshtakiwa endapo kuna madudu na mambo mengine aliwahi kuyafanya akiwa Mkuu wa Mkoa maana wote hawa wakuu wa mihimili tayari wana kinga ya kutoshtakiwa.

Sasa hapa ndio panakuwa pagumu maana kwa lazima anaweza akahakikisha anapita ili apewe kinga.

Ila mkuu wewe Ni hater. Makonda unamjua kweli. Je we unahusika na shughuli zake. Kwanini unajitesa Hivi kutunga maujinga.

 

[Jumbe Brown]

Makonda anawanyima Usingizi sana Mafirauni, Wauza Unga, Wasio na Marinda, Wazee wa Shisha, Wazee wa Kutelekeza Familia nk.
Kijana mwenzako kwanini umchukie badala tuombeane heri maana sote tumeumbwa kwa mfano wa Mungu!
Kila lakheri Baba Keagan.

Aaaaamen Aaaaamen Mungu Amtangulie Mh.Makonda aaaamen🤲🤲🤲

 

[Jumbe Brown]

Makonda amekuwa overrated sana mpaka inatia kinyaa

😞😞😞😞

 

[Gerald .M Magembe]

Unataka uhalisia gani wewe?

Ya "Natural principle??"

Kama ni hiyo, Fanya hivi:

Nenda kaibe kwa jirani yako. Kisha wakukamate uone namna kanuni hii inavyotenda kazi yake...

Ni lazima ulipie gharama ya tendo la wizi wako...!

Yaweza kuwa "kupigwa na kumwagiwa petrol/mafuta ya taa mpaka ufe hapohapo" au ukibahatika kusevu kifo cha mawe na moto, basi "tutakukuta Polisi na kisha mahakamani"

Narudia tena: HAKUNA SHERIA YA KULINDA UOVU WA BINADAMU, HAKUNA TENDO OVU LISILO NA MSHAHARA WAKE, HAIPO...HALIPO....!!

Kila OVU ni punishable....

Unataka uhalisia gani wewe?

Ya "Natural principle??"

Kama ni hiyo, Fanya hivi:

Nenda kaibe kwa jirani yako. Kisha wakukamate uone namna kanuni hii inavyotenda kazi yake...

Ni lazima ulipie gharama ya tendo la wizi wako...!

Yaweza kuwa "kupigwa na kumwagiwa petrol/mafuta ya taa mpaka ufe hapohapo" au ukibahatika kusevu kifo cha mawe na moto, basi "tutakukuta Polisi na kisha mahakamani"

Narudia tena: HAKUNA SHERIA YA KULINDA UOVU WA BINADAMU, HAKUNA TENDO OVU LISILO NA MSHAHARA WAKE, HAIPO...HALIPO....!!

Kila OVU ni punishable....

Mkuu hili ni suala pana kidogo lakini ukweli unabaki suala lolote linapopitishwa kuwa sheria basi tunalazimika kufuata hata kama hatulipendi.
hili suala ni la kisheria na napata taabu kuliweka kiswahili but you should read the following to be able to exactly know how the law works.

Scholars of the law, like myself, understand that law is politics. That in fact law is a servant of politics, and not the other way round.

This point should be completely uncontroversial because it’s Jurisprudence 101.

If you think of the law as an instrument for organizing, changing, regulating, perpetuating, governing and preserving a society and its basic civilisation, then your heart won’t be broken by this column.

But if you think of the law as some kind of church doctrine that’s pure, neutral, unbiased, apolitical, and beyond fallibility, then you are going to end up in tears.



CLASS IMPOSITION

The law doesn’t exist or live, in a vacuum. Nor does it materialise out of thin air. The law is based on a society’s norms, which are drawn from its dominant civilization. Norms are fountains of knowledge and wisdom in which the law is sheathed. The law can protect you, or harm you. Like a sword, it’s double-edged and cuts both ways. It’s indeterminate. That’s why laws and norms are end products of political processes. They are the distillation of social, ethical, religious or class-based interests of elites. Often, laws are a class imposition by a hegemonic group, or elites in society over subordinate, or subaltern, strata. Some examples are blatant.

Colonial laws were openly racist to preserve and perpetuate the exploitation and exclusion of blacks from the goods of society.

Laws are often gender-discriminatory. For instance, girls are often denied the right to inherit property.

In some countries, a woman citizen cannot by law pass her citizenship to a child with a non-citizen man, while the man can. Under versions of sharia law, a woman isn’t fully human with all rights.

PROCEDURE

In a modern society, even a democratic one, laws are made by the political branches of the state.

Laws are passed by the legislature through elected representatives or by factotums in the executive, which is also a political arm of the state.

Thus, politicians or executive bureaucrats known as civil servants make, or interpret the law. Legislatively, all laws are products of compromises among contending social forces in society.


There’s a misunderstanding about what courts do. The notion of judicial independence – where the courts are the guardians of legality – doesn’t mean that judges aren’t political.

Nor does the principle of the rule of law remove politics from the judicial process. The rule of law means that laws must have a basic core minimum of fairness to safeguard basic human rights and due process protections.

Crucially, the rule of law requires that courts not be subject to executive fiat, arbitrariness, discrimination and opacity.

THE BENCH

But the rule of law doesn’t mean that judges leave their political biases, religious bigotries and political ideologies at the door. No – that’s not humanly possible when judges interpret the law.

Judges are inherently political beings. That’s why courts are political institutions. Courts are an arm of the state, which is a political institution.

That’s why good lawyers often predict how certain judges will rule based on their ideology and political philosophy.

In the Supreme Court of the United States, like all other courts world over, judges harbour ideological biases.

There’s never a doubt how Justice Clarence Thomas, a staunch Christian conservative, is likely to rule on most cases.

That’s why the Supreme Court Of The United States (SCOTUS) is often split 5-4 based on the political ideologies of judges

 

[BUSH BIN LADEN]

Mkuu hili ni suala pana kidogo lakini ukweli unabaki suala lolote linapopitishwa kuwa sheria basi tunalazimika kufuata hata kama hatulipendi.
hili suala ni la kisheria na napata taabu kuliweka kiswahili but you should read the following to be able to exactly know how the law works.

Scholars of the law, like myself, understand that law is politics. That in fact law is a servant of politics, and not the other way round.

This point should be completely uncontroversial because it’s Jurisprudence 101.

If you think of the law as an instrument for organizing, changing, regulating, perpetuating, governing and preserving a society and its basic civilisation, then your heart won’t be broken by this column.

But if you think of the law as some kind of church doctrine that’s pure, neutral, unbiased, apolitical, and beyond fallibility, then you are going to end up in tears.



CLASS IMPOSITION

The law doesn’t exist or live, in a vacuum. Nor does it materialise out of thin air. The law is based on a society’s norms, which are drawn from its dominant civilization. Norms are fountains of knowledge and wisdom in which the law is sheathed. The law can protect you, or harm you. Like a sword, it’s double-edged and cuts both ways. It’s indeterminate. That’s why laws and norms are end products of political processes. They are the distillation of social, ethical, religious or class-based interests of elites. Often, laws are a class imposition by a hegemonic group, or elites in society over subordinate, or subaltern, strata. Some examples are blatant.

Colonial laws were openly racist to preserve and perpetuate the exploitation and exclusion of blacks from the goods of society.

Laws are often gender-discriminatory. For instance, girls are often denied the right to inherit property.

In some countries, a woman citizen cannot by law pass her citizenship to a child with a non-citizen man, while the man can. Under versions of sharia law, a woman isn’t fully human with all rights.

PROCEDURE

In a modern society, even a democratic one, laws are made by the political branches of the state.

Laws are passed by the legislature through elected representatives or by factotums in the executive, which is also a political arm of the state.

Thus, politicians or executive bureaucrats known as civil servants make, or interpret the law. Legislatively, all laws are products of compromises among contending social forces in society.


There’s a misunderstanding about what courts do. The notion of judicial independence – where the courts are the guardians of legality – doesn’t mean that judges aren’t political.

Nor does the principle of the rule of law remove politics from the judicial process. The rule of law means that laws must have a basic core minimum of fairness to safeguard basic human rights and due process protections.

Crucially, the rule of law requires that courts not be subject to executive fiat, arbitrariness, discrimination and opacity.

THE BENCH

But the rule of law doesn’t mean that judges leave their political biases, religious bigotries and political ideologies at the door. No – that’s not humanly possible when judges interpret the law.

Judges are inherently political beings. That’s why courts are political institutions. Courts are an arm of the state, which is a political institution.

That’s why good lawyers often predict how certain judges will rule based on their ideology and political philosophy.

In the Supreme Court of the United States, like all other courts world over, judges harbour ideological biases.

There’s never a doubt how Justice Clarence Thomas, a staunch Christian conservative, is likely to rule on most cases.

That’s why the Supreme Court Of The United States (SCOTUS) is often split 5-4 based on the political ideologies of judges

Mkuu akirudi na hoja akaipangua hii ya kwako tafadhali nitag

 

[Gerald .M Magembe]

Mkuu akirudi na hoja akaipangua hii ya kwako tafadhali nitag

Mkuu nitafanya hivyo.

 

[Gerald .M Magembe]

Alishinda yale ya Kihiyo wa Temeke kujirudia safari ishu ya vyeti vya kubumba lazima imtafune.

Muda mwingi nasoma maandiko yako, mengi huyaona ushabiki tuu. Lakini leo nimehakikisha pasi na shaka una macho manne, unaweza kuona ambapo wengi wanaweza kupata taabu kuona. asante.

 

[minyoo]

Kwahiyo Dr Tulia hawi Spika tena?

Ufipa mnaweweseka sana.......bunge linatunga na kutengua sheria!

Siyo kila anayekataa vioja vya CCM anatoka ufipa wapo CCM wenye msimamo wa ubinadamu ambao huchukuzwa na ujinga unaofanyika huko CCM kwao lakini hawana pa kusemea ndiyo maana huja Jukwaani kusema yaliyo mioyoni mwao.