The Lema Verdict: Did the Court of Appeal encroach on litigation rights of a voter?

[Rutashubanyuma]

It would have been among good judgements in my view if the Election Act was silent on who can challenge election results. The fact that the law is clear and unambigous on that point renders the judgement inconsistent with the law. it seems to me that the justices of the Court of Appeal had in their mind common law while the specific law governing election petitions in Tanzania is the National Elections Act.

This judgement should not remian in the laws of Tanzania as it lay down a very bad precedent which may lead to political problems. For, if the Parliament legislate and the Court constructively amend the legislation which it think bad what will happen if the legislature amends the judgements of courts by enacting new pieces of legislation where it finds that the judgements are bad? Who will be the legislature of legislature and a judge of judge?

In this very age of rule of law and Constitutional supremacy, the judge of judge and legislature of legislature should be the Constitution. So that the Court can only nullify a Parliamentary enactment if it is repugnant to the Constitution and the Legislature would legislate to prevent the judicairy from making decisions inconstent with the Constitution.

The effect of this unnecessary incrochment of powers between the two organs of state was evident in the Mtikila case. The High Court had rightly nullified the statutory provision in the Election Act which imposed a condition for a Parliamentary and Presidential candidate to be a member of a political party on the ground that it was inconsisted with the Constitutional provision on right to vote and being voted for. The Parliament reacted by amending the Constitution and inserting the same provision of the Election Act in the Constitution knowing that the Judiciary will not be able to nullify the said provision because the Judiciary is inferior to the Constitution. The problem is yet to be resolved as the matter is subjudice to the African Court of Justice. Why should the Judiciary repeats the same problem? Is that not tentamount into making whaet of one and chaf of another.




QUOTE=masanjas;5301609]The verdct is among the good judgement in our country,you cannot challenge anything that you were not injured,you have to show how the act your complaining affected you personally not to come complaining without reasonable course.

In short matters of locus stand were raised by both the ag and lemas advocate and we expected the trial judges to make a rulling on it favourable to the lema side but to the surporise it was different.

Election result are voice of perple which need be respected. this also is not new in the case of wilblod slaa against arusha kalwa the voters were asked to show injuries they suffered only to find that there vote was a problem they were adviced that they have to add there vote to person they want if he will win, automatically he failed and the case come to end.so this is not new, challenging election result you have to show the injury you sufferd.

Its costive to call another election on unreasonable ground,simply to sutisfy one or two or three person the hired gun.with this jurgement all the case like that of meatu and shinyanga are dead cases, i advice them to withdral.

The isssue of integrity of election are protected by the c ommision of election through established principles that give power to several organs to oversee the campaing process including the ag,police and obsevers we belive election which are not objected by them is genuine.

[/QUOTE]

George Jinasa Bila ya kutathiminiwa kideo chenye hotuba za lema huwezi kuwatia doa wapinga marejeo. Wao walithibitisha malalamiko yao kwa kuleta kideo sasa kama kideo hakikutathiminiwa mahakama kuu ilibidi mahakama ya rufaa ikitathimini na kwa vile hakikutathiminiwa mahakama ya rufaa ilijitungia uamzui wake kutoka kibindoni kwake.......................yaani inashangaza kweli sijui hawa majaji huwa wanawaokota wapi?

 

[Rutashubanyuma]

Unajua wanasheria mtaendelea kutusaidia na pia kutuchanganya. Hivi hoja kuu katika kesi ya Arusha ilikuwa ni nini hasa mgombea kukashifiwa?

Voting irregularity and unfair election. Kama ni kukashifiwa basi haki ya kutafuta repair siyo ya kila mtu isipokuwa aliyekashifiwa tu. Kama ni voting irregularity na unfair election basi mpiga kura anaweza kulalamika na ana haki ya kusikilizwa.

Mghaka ni vyema ungeliisoma hukumu yenyewe. Mahakama ya Rufaa haikutofautisha hizi nyanja za kukashifiwa na unair election................................ingawaje kesi hii iligusa yote hayo......................hakuna fair election kama lugha chafu zinatumika.....................period.

 

[Rutashubanyuma]

Kaka Rutashubanyuma, mimi naona si haki kwa mtu ambaye haki yake haijaathiriwa na kampeni za uchaguzi kwenda kupinga matokeo mahakamani kwani hii inawanyima haki wapiga kura wengi ambao walikuwa na haki ya kumchagua waliyekuwa wanamtaka.

Ozzie Utajuaje kuwa haki zake hazijaathirika wakati hata ushahidi aliokuletea hutaki kuupima? Kama jamii nzima ilitukanwa mahakama bado ingelisema haki za wapigakura hazijaathirika? Mbaya zaidi wao walikwisha kuwafuta kwenye oroddha ya wapigakura wapinga rufani bila hata ya kuwapatia nafasi ya kuzijibu khoja ambazo mahakama ya rufaa ilizitumia kwenye kufikia maamuzi haya. Haki ya asili ya wapinga rufani ilikiukwa na huu uamuzi maana walikuja kufahamu ya kuwa Mahakama ya Rufaa haiwatambuwi kama wapiga kura wakati walipoupata uamuzi. Ni nini kiliizuia mahakama ya rufaa kuwauliza juu ya hizo khoja ukuzingatia sheria ya uchaguzi iko wazi ushahidi ni kwenye maeneo ambayo yanabishaniwa na hilo halikuwa mojawapo?

 

[Rutashubanyuma]

umenijibu vyema sana mie hapa hapa nataka kupata jibu la swali hili hapa
kama Lema alimtusi mgombea mwenzie hadharani, na ikathibitika kwamba ametusi mtu hivi ni kosa kwa aliyemskia kumshtaki hata kama hatukanwi yy?? na je hivi kama mtu anaiba nyumba ya jiran mm ambaye sio jiran sipaswi kuita mwizi simply kwamba sina faida yyte ama hasara kwa anayeibiwa??

gfsonwin usiseme hata kama hatukanwi yeye.....sisi hatujui Lema alisema nini na hata kama alimtukana batilda yawezekana kabisa tafsiri ya hiyo lugha ikawa kutukana jamii...........kwa mfano mtu akiukashifu uchi wa mwanamke.........na washitaki ni wanaumme isije ikasemekana eti mbona wao siyo wanawake..........wakati tuna watoto wa kike, mama zetu na dada zetu wametukanwa?

 

[Rutashubanyuma]

This matter is a done deal; Lissu did not make any rulling here he was only an appelant consel; your cries of the wolf do not matter and will not change the decision; why didnt you apply to appear in matter as a friend of the court so you could make your voice heard and make a positive intervention?! if you want you may appeal to the law reform commission. The US election law has no bearing on our law of the land; it is not a matter of copy paste.

MTK Do not say it now a done deal...................this ruling has wide implications beyond the lema fate as an MP............................................my focus has nothing to do with Lema as a person but what bearing this ruling has in the future conduct of electoral litigation................that is all

Am pleased that you have tersely noted my input could have a positive intervention to the case............the problem was how would I have known that the courts are such lousy ones............it was only after the ruling I became aware of this sad fact...........

marekani nimeitolea mfano kwa sababu sheria yao ya ychaguzi kwenye hili eneo inafannanana ya kwetu sasa niwashangaa hawa majaji kwa kutoa tafsiri inayotofautiana na hawa ambao sisi sheria zetu tumewaiga.......................inapokuja kuchakachua sheria tunadai sisi siyo fotokopi......inapokuja kuzinakili na kuziasisha hapo hatuziiti fotokopi................................what a double standard

 

[gfsonwin]

gfsonwin usiseme hata kama hatukanwi yeye.....sisi hatujui Lema alisema nini na hata kama alimtukana batilda yawezekana kabisa tafsiri ya hiyo lugha ikawa kutukana jamii...........kwa mfano mtu akiukashifu uchi wa mwanamke.........na washitaki ni wanaumme isije ikasemekana eti mbona wao siyo wanawake..........wakati tuna watoto wa kike, mama zetu na dada zetu wametukanwa?

hivyo mtu baki anaweza kushtaki sio?? sasa kwann majaji waseme aliyepaswa kushtak sio jamii ni mtu husika? ama sikuelewa vzr?

 

[Rutashubanyuma]

sina maana hiyo nisamehe na nakuomba unisaidie kujibu swali langu hili.

gfsonwin well nimekujibu lile la ziada maana la awali umesema umeridhika na jibu ulilopewa.......

 

[Rutashubanyuma]

hivyo mtu baki anaweza kushtaki sio?? sasa kwann majaji waseme aliyepaswa kushtak sio jamii ni mtu husika? ama sikuelewa vzr?

gfsonwin wao wametoa tafsiri ambayo inakinzana na katiba na sheria ya uchagzui na ndiyo maana tunahoji hivi ni shule zipi wenzetu walisoma maana wanaonekana ni wababaishaji tu?

 

[gfsonwin]

gfsonwin wao wametoa tafsiri ambayo inakinzana na katiba na sheria ya uchagzui na ndiyo maana tunahoji hivi ni shule zipi wenzetu walisoma maana wanaonekana ni wababaishaji tu?

najijua mie ni kishoka/kilaza wa sheria ila ni mtu ambaye napenda sana kuuliza kwa wanaojua hata kama nauliza kwao litakuwa ni jambo dogo sana.

sasa basi kwa mantiki hiyo tafsiri ambayo imetumika ni tofauti na sheria za uchaguzi je ni sahihi kusema kwamba hukumu ni ya haki??

na je kwann wenye akili dogo kama zangu tusiseme tu kwamba iliamriwa iwe hivyo ili waridhishwe ila ukweli utabaki kuwa ukweli?? nasema hivyo manake sijui na narudia tena SIJUI vifungu vya sheria kiundani ila tu najitahd kuelewa concepts zinazotolewa na wanaojua.

 

[gfsonwin]

MTK Do not say it now a done deal...................this ruling has wide implications beyond the lema fate as an MP............................................my focus has nothing to do with Lema as a person but what bearing this ruling has in the future conduct of electoral litigation................that is all

Am pleased that you have tersely noted my input could have a positive intervention to the case............the problem was how would I have known that the courts are such lousy ones............it was only after the ruling I became aware of this sad fact...........

marekani nimeitolea mfano kwa sababu sheria yao ya ychaguzi kwenye hili eneo inafannanana ya kwetu sasa niwashangaa hawa majaji kwa kutoa tafsiri inayotofautiana na hawa ambao sisi sheria zetu tumewaiga.......................inapokuja kuchakachua sheria tunadai sisi siyo fotokopi......inapokuja kuzinakili na kuziasisha hapo hatuziiti fotokopi................................what a double standard

ruttashubanyuma with due diligence i dare to say something is not known to us. the good people to say it are the judges who ruled the case as why such double standards?? and what will be the fate for future electoral litigation

 

[Rutashubanyuma]

ruttashubanyuma with due diligence i dare to say something is not known to us. the good people to say it are the judges who ruled the case as why such double standards?? and what will be the fate for future electoral litigation

gfsonwin labda katiba hii ifafanue zaidi lakini majaji wakorofi watajitahidi kuja na tafsiri zao.......................lakini kwa wapigakura ambao hawaridhiki na mwenendo wa matokeo ya uchaguzi bado ni haki yao kwenda mbele na kusikia majaji wanasemaje pamoja na hii hukumu sasa kuwa kikwazo katika ufunguaji wa masuala ya namna hii.....................labda waleta marejeo warudi tena Mahakama ya Rufaa a kuomba marejeo kwa kutumia khoja kama hizi au na nyinginezo walizonazo....................tatizo la masuala ya namna hii yanahitaji fedha na nasikia hawana hela ya kuendelea kudai haki yao...............haki hapa kwetu ni ya mwenye vijisenti......................lol

 

[Rutashubanyuma]

najijua mie ni kishoka/kilaza wa sheria ila ni mtu ambaye napenda sana kuuliza kwa wanaojua hata kama nauliza kwao litakuwa ni jambo dogo sana.

sasa basi kwa mantiki hiyo tafsiri ambayo imetumika ni tofauti na sheria za uchaguzi je ni sahihi kusema kwamba hukumu ni ya haki??

na je kwann wenye akili dogo kama zangu tusiseme tu kwamba iliamriwa iwe hivyo ili waridhishwe ila ukweli utabaki kuwa ukweli?? nasema hivyo manake sijui na narudia tena SIJUI vifungu vya sheria kiundani ila tu najitahd kuelewa concepts zinazotolewa na wanaojua.

gfsonwin katiba Ibara ya 26 (2) na sheria ya uchaguzi kifungu cha 111 (1) (a) vimeweka wazi kuwa mpigakura anayo haki ya kuhoji uhalalai wa matokeo ya kura aliyoshiriki majaji hawa sasa wameandika sheria yao mpya na kufuta ile ya zamani kwa kudai wao wameitafisiri vizuri..................inachanganya kwa wengi hilo...

 

[gfsonwin]

gfsonwin katiba Ibara ya 26 (2) na sheria ya uchaguzi kifungu cha 111 (1) (a) vimeweka wazi kuwa mpigakura anayo haki ya kuhoji uhalalai wa matokeo ya kura aliyoshiriki majaji hawa sasa wameandika sheria yao mpya na kufuta ile ya zamani kwa kudai wao wameitafisiri vizuri..................inachanganya kwa wengi hilo...

kumbe basi tuko wengi ambao tumebaki na maswali ya kutoelewa na nikaishia kusema mie kishoka wa sheria sijui lolote.
kwani Rutashubanyuma kuna tafsiri tofauti za sheria?? hadi huyu asema tumeitafsiri vzr zaid??

 

[Rutashubanyuma]

kumbe basi tuko wengi ambao tumebaki na maswali ya kutoelewa na nikaishia kusema mie kishoka wa sheria sijui lolote.
kwani Rutashubanyuma kuna tafsiri tofauti za sheria?? hadi huyu asema tumeitafsiri vzr zaid??

gfsonwin tafsiri za sheria kama zilivyo za mambo mengineyo huwa nyingi kulingana na mtu mwenyewe anavyoona........na huyo anayesema wametafsiri vizuri ni kuwa kauufarahia uamuzi leo ingawaje kesho utakapokuja kuwa shubiri kwake atasema walikosea.............siyo kuwa hatuelewi tunaelewa walichokifanya ila sikubaliani nao......naona ni wavivu wa kuyachambua mambo wametafuta njia ya mkato kuimaliza kesi......na ndiyo maana hata hukumu yao ni kurasa moja tu........wavivu wakusoma na kuandika..........

 

[CHUAKACHARA]

Rutashubanyuma, Nimesoma maoni yako but what I say is this:

Mahakama ya Rufaa haikujadili hoja yoyote ya rufaa on merit. Ilijadili preliminary objection-The petitioners have go no LOCUS STANDI. Warufaa walibase rufani yao kwenye Mgonja case ambayo kimsingi ilitumia kifungu cha 26(2) kuwa hata kama their rights have not been infringed, they have the right to bring the action against Lema. Lakini ukisoma kifungu hicho kwa makini, between lines, utaona kuwa kina-impose conditionalities:

26(2) Kila mtu ana haki, kwa kufuata utaratibu uliowekwa na sheria, kuchukua hatua za kisheria kuhakikisha hifadhi ya Katiba na sheria za nchi.

Kwenye red hapo, pamoja na kuwa na haki ya kufungua shauri, lakini lazima utimize masharti ya sheria zingine. Mojawapo ya sheria hizo ni common Law on the doctrine of LOCUS STANDI. Majaji walikuwa sahihi kabisa. Sheria zetu zinatokana na Common Law almost by over 99%!. To my knowledge, doctrine of LOCUS STANDI has never undergone any change. Unless you deny the doctrine of JURISDICTION, then ........

Katika taratibu za mahakama, lazima uwe na LOCUS STAND kabla ya kusikiliza hoja zako. Lazima uwe na uhalali wa kufungua kesi. Kama huna uhalali wa kufungua kesi, mahakama haiwezi kusikiliza hoja zako. Ndicho kilichotokea kwa rufaa ya Lema. Warufani hawakuwa na uhalali wa kufungua kesi, hivyo hoja za rufani haziwezi kusikilizwa maana High court haikusikiliza hoja ya Preliminary objection rightly!

Mahakama ilibidi ijiridhishe kwanza kama warufani wana uhalali wa kufungua kesi. Ni issue ya jurisdiction, mfano mahakama ya wilaya/hakimu mkazi/ya mwanzo haziwezi kusikiliza kesi ya mauaji. Ukifungua kesi ya mauaji district court, haiwezi kusikilizwa kwa sababu mahakama hiyo haina mamlaka ya kusikiliza kesi za namna hiyo- huu ni mfano kati ya mingi ambao unaeleweka kirahisi, ndio maana ya jurisdiction!

 

[Ronn M]

@Rutashubanyuma,

Swala la ushahidi wa video ni swala ambalo lilipaswa kuwa determined na High Court. Ikiwa ushahidi huo ulipelekwa mahakamani na ukawa admitted kisha jaji akapuuza kuuzingatia, hilo ni kosa la jaji wa mahakama kuu. Swala linapokwenda court of appeal si kazi ya court of appeal kusikiliza kesi (trying the case) bali kuamua rufaa. Ikiwa kuna upande wowote uliona kuna tatizo kwenye admission ya huo ushahidi, ulipaswa kuiomba court of appeal iagize kesi kusikilizwa upya na jaji mwigine (retrial). Hii inatokea kukiwa na irregularities zilizopelekea kupoteza haki ya mtu! Sasa kama huo ushahidi haukupelekwa High Court tusetegemee court of appeal waanza kuchunguza kitua ambacho hakikuwepo in the first place.Pili, kuna mambo mengine katika kesi yakiamuliwa yanaathiri mwenendo mzima wa shauri na hiyo mahakama haina haja ya kuendelea na hoja zingine. Kwa mfano kama case imepita mda wake wa kusikilizwa (time barred) au mahakama haina mamlaka ya kuisikiliza (jurisdiction), itaitupilia mbali kesi hiyo wala haitaangalia maswala ya msingi ya kesi hiyo (the substance of the case). Sasa katika swala la Lema, kujua kwamba wajibu rufaa walikuwa na haki ya kufungua kesi hiyo ni swala la msingi. Mahakama imeona hawakuwa na haki ya kufungua kesi hiyo (ama hawakuwa na locus stand). Sasa kama hawakuwa na locus stand hakuna haja ya kuendelea na hoja nyingine however good they might be!

 

[gfsonwin]

gfsonwin tafsiri za sheria kama zilivyo za mambo mengineyo huwa nyingi kulingana na mtu mwenyewe anavyoona........na huyo anayesema wametafsiri vizuri ni kuwa kauufarahia uamuzi leo ingawaje kesho utakapokuja kuwa shubiri kwake atasema walikosea.............siyo kuwa hatuelewi tunaelewa walichokifanya ila sikubaliani nao......naona ni wavivu wa kuyachambua mambo wametafuta njia ya mkato kuimaliza kesi......na ndiyo maana hata hukumu yao ni kurasa moja tu........wavivu wakusoma na kuandika..........

ivi wajua kwann naipenda zaid sayansi ni kwasababu huwa iko straightforwad. leo hii ukitaja newton's laws of motion ni zile zile ingawa zina mulitple applications ila sheria siipend kwasababu kila siku ina definition tofauti and it gives me some problems when writing my contracts, like there are no common definition of some contractual terms. every term shld be defined according to the meant purpose.

 

[gfsonwin]

Rutashubanyuma,

Swala la ushahidi wa video ni swala ambalo lilipaswa kuwa determined na High Court. Ikiwa ushahidi huo ulipelekwa mahakamani na ukawa admitted kisha jaji akapuuza kuuzingatia, hilo ni kosa la jaji wa mahakama kuu. Swala linapokwenda court of appeal si kazi ya court of appeal kusikiliza kesi (trying the case) bali kuamua rufaa. Ikiwa kuna upande wowote uliona kuna tatizo kwenye admission ya huo ushahidi, ulipaswa kuiomba court of appeal iagize kesi kusikilizwa upya na jaji mwigine (retrial). Hii inatokea kukiwa na irregularities zilizopelekea kupoteza haki ya mtu! Sasa kama huo ushahidi haukupelekwa High Court tusetegemee court of appeal waanza kuchunguza kitua ambacho hakikuwepo in the first place.Pili, kuna mambo mengine katika kesi yakiamuliwa yanaathiri mwenendo mzima wa shauri na hiyo mahakama haina haja ya kuendelea na hoja zingine. Kwa mfano kama case imepita mda wake wa kusikilizwa (time barred) au mahakama haina mamlaka ya kuisikiliza (jurisdiction), itaitupilia mbali kesi hiyo wala haitaangalia maswala ya msingi ya kesi hiyo (the substance of the case). Sasa katika swala la Lema, kujua kwamba wajibu rufaa walikuwa na haki ya kufungua kesi hiyo ni swala la msingi. Mahakama imeona hawakuwa na haki ya kufungua kesi hiyo (ama hawakuwa na locus stand). Sasa kama hawakuwa na locus stand hakuna haja ya kuendelea na hoja nyingine however good they might be!

mwanagu Ronn M merry x-mass.

haya nieleweshe hapa hivi wataka kuniambia kwamba wajbu rufaa ndio mahakama kuu ama mahakama ya rufaa??
na je wataka kuniambia kwamba rufaa imepita sawa majaji wa mahakama kuu hawawez kupinga hukumu hii ya rufaa??

 

[Ronn M]

Ronn M Huwezi kufikia mahitimisho haya wakati ushahidi wa kideo si mahakama kuu au Mahakama ya Rufaa ambayo ilichunguza hilo............................you are only being prejudicial in making such vacuous assertions.......

Sasa ndugu mahakama si inaamua basing on the evidence presented? Remember we are using adversarial system. Court has no duty to make inquiry kama ilivyo kwenye inquisitorial system. Sasa kama ushahidi huo haukuletwa then hauwezi kuchunguzwa! You ve to make your case strong in court sir, usitegemee mahakama ifanye on your behalf. Copy ya High court judgement nimeiacha Dar, so sikumbuki sana kama ushahidi wa CD uliletwa mahakamani, ila kama haukuletwa si High Court wala Court of Appeal ilipaswa kuuchunguza.

 

[Ronn M]

mwanagu Ronn M merry x-mass.

haya nieleweshe hapa hivi wataka kuniambia kwamba wajbu rufaa ndio mahakama kuu ama mahakama ya rufaa??
na je wataka kuniambia kwamba rufaa imepita sawa majaji wa mahakama kuu hawawez kupinga hukumu hii ya rufaa??

Merry Christmas sweetheart, love u ma!

Wajibu rufaa ni wale ambao walikuwa wanamshtaki Lema katika mahakama kuu. Pale huitwa Plaintiffs na anayeshtakiwa anaitwa Defendant. Sasa inapokwenda kwenye ngazi ya rufaa, yule anayekat rufani anaitwa appellant (mrufani) ambaye ni Lema na wanolalamikiwa katika rufani hiyo wanaitwa wajibu rufani yaani respondents ambao ndio wale wa CCM.

Kuhusu majaji wa mahakama kuu kupinga hilo haliwezekani mama yangu gfsonwin. Mahakama ya rufaa ipo juu ya mahakama kuu na uamuzi wa mahakama ya rufaa ndio huchukuliwa kuwa ni uamuzi halali wa mahakama. Mahakama zote za chini zinapaswa kufuata jinsi mahakama ilivyoamua mpaka hapo itakapoamua vinginevyo au bunge litakapotunga sheria mpya