Wanasheria Njaa: Mnaaibisha Fani nzima ya Sheria

[Asprin]

Bado niko PM nakusubiri, unakuja kwa fasitijeti au puresishen???

Nakuja na ngarangara la ATCL. likifeli breki, tutaonana paradiso.

 

[Nyani Ngabu]

Acha kushadidia mambo usiyoyafahamu,hiyo hoja ya Nyani Ngabu aliyotushinda iko wapi? Siwezi kuendelea kubishana na Nyani kwa sababu nimeshamfahamu ni mtu wa aina gani.
Lawyer's stock in trade is TIME and ADVICE. So I can't waste my precious time arguing with an imbecile like him. He is not only an ignorant but also a fool.

Why the ad hominem attack?

Calling me ignorant, a fool, and whatnot does not answer the questions I raised nor does it make your arguments any valid.

That is very unseemly of you.

 

[nameless girl]

Haya, sawa si kosa langu. Yajibu basi yale maswali yangu. Kama umeyasahau haya hapa chini:

Hivi mtu atashindwaje kuitafsiri sheria?

Na mwanasheria yeye ana uwezo gani zaidi ambao watu wengine wasio wanasheria hawana, ambao unamwezesha yeye kuweza kutafsiri sheria?

Na hapa unazungumzia tafsiri. Tafsiri mara nyingi huwa si objective bali huwa subjective. Kwa hiyo, je, inawezekana ukapata wanasheria tofauti na kila mmoja wao akawa na tafsiri yake?

Kama ni hivyo (kila mwanasheria akawa na tafsiri yake), iweje sasa kwa mtu asiye mwanasheria naye akawa na tafsiri yake lakini tafsiri yake hiyo ikaonekana kana kwamba si sahihi (kama kuna usahihi kwenye tafsiri) bali ile ya mwanasheria tu ndiyo sahihi ilhali tafsiri huwa ziko subjective?

Kutafsiri sheria ni zaidi ya kutafsiri kwa lugha kama unavyodhani.
Mtu anashindwa kutafsiri sheria kutokana na kukosa UELEWA fulani.
Mwanasheria ana taaluma hiyo hivyo ana uelewa wa kutafsiri sheria ipasavyo. Watu wasio na uelewa huu hudhani ni kutafsiri toka lugha moja kwenda nyingine, si kweli.
Mfano niliokupa mwanzo wa contract, wewe unaweza kutafsiri contract kama agreement between two or more than two people na ukaishia hapo lakini tafsiri ya contract ni zaidi ya makubaliano. Makubaliano pekee hayawezi kuwa contract ili kujua vitu hivyo ni lazima kuendana na vifungu vya sheria ya mikataba. Unadhani wote wanajua hayo zaidi ya aliyeyasomea? hivyo utofauti upo kwenye maana kiundani zaidi.
Wanasheria wanaweza kua na mitazamo tofauti kitafsiri ndo maana kuna upinzani na mivutano mahakamani. Mfano murder, ili accused apatikane na hatia ni lazima ushahidi ujitosheleze. Ili accused awe murderer lazima kuwe na reasons za msingi. Kwanini mmoja aseme ni intended murder mwengine akatae, tafsiri pekee haitoshi.
Unatafsiri kwa vifungu na si kichwa chako. Toa mfano wa mtu asiyesomea sheria aliyetumia tafsiri toka kwenye vifungu vya sheria kama ipasavyo alafu akapingwa.

 

[Nyani Ngabu]

Kutafsiri sheria ni zaidi ya kutafsiri kwa lugha kama unavyodhani.

Huo uzaidi wa kutafsiri sheria ni upi? Naomba uuelezee kinagaubaga na kwa mifano, tafadhali.

Mtu anashindwa kutafsiri sheria kutokana na kukosa UELEWA fulani.

Huo uelewa fulani ndo upi? Naomba nao uuelezee kwa mifano.

Mwanasheria ana taaluma hiyo hivyo ana uelewa wa kutafsiri sheria ipasavyo.

Ukoje huo uelewa? Tofauti yake na uelewa mwingine ni nini?

Watu wasio na uelewa huu hudhani ni kutafsiri toka lugha moja kwenda nyingine, si kweli.

Huo uelewa ukoje? Unaitwaje? Unaweza kunipa mifano mitano?

Mfano niliokupa mwanzo wa contract, wewe unaweza kutafsiri contract kama agreement between two or more than two people na ukaishia hapo lakini tafsiri ya contract ni zaidi ya makubaliano.

Uzaidi wake ni nini?

Makubaliano pekee hayawezi kuwa contract ili kujua vitu hivyo ni lazima kuendana na vifungu vya sheria ya mikataba.

Sasa kama mtu akiisoma hiyo sheria ya mkataba si atavijua hivyo vifungu? Au hivyo vifungu havieleweki katika common parlance hadi uwe " mwanasheria msomi"?

Halafu wewe hapa unazungumzia makubaliano kiujumla mno. Ni nani ambaye anaweza kufikiri mimi na wewe kama tukikubaliana kwenda lunch sehemu itakuwa tumeingia mkataba? Ni juha tu awezaye kudhani hivyo.

Unadhani wote wanajua hayo zaidi ya aliyeyasomea?

Asiyejua ni uvivu wake tu maana hizo sheria nyingi zinapatikana karibu kila sehemu. Kuna vitabu vinavyoelezea hayo (nimeshaviona kadhaa kwenye duka la vitabu la Scholastic), kuna watu wana mablogs yao na huziweka hizo sheria, na kadhalika.

hivyo utofauti upo kwenye maana kiundani zaidi.

Huo undani ni upi na ukoje?

Wanasheria wanaweza kua na mitazamo tofauti kitafsiri ndo maana kuna upinzani na mivutano mahakamani.

Basi hata raia wabeba maboksi kama mimi tunaweza kuwa na mitazamo tofauti na wanasheria pia. Kwa hiyo kama ni suala la mitazamo tu, hiyo haimaanishi kwamba mwanasheria ndo ana usemi wa mwisho kuhusu tafsiri maana essence ya tafsiri ni subjective and that's why law is madeningly subjective and not exact science.

Mfano murder, ili accused apatikane na hatia ni lazima ushahidi ujitosheleze.

I know this already. Na siyo murder tu. Hata rape, child cruelty, child endangerment, etc., etc.,

Ili accused awe murderer lazima kuwe na reasons za msingi.

Ili accused awe murderer? That doesn't make any sense. One can be a murderer and not be accused and one can be accused and not be a murderer. And that's why there are wrongful convictions out there.

Nadhani ulichokuwa unataka kusema ili mtu apatikane na hatia ya kosa kubwa kama la mauaji basi ni lazima ushahidi dhidi yake ukidhi threshold ya beyond a reasonable doubt (which itself is a a highly subjective standard)

Kwanini mmoja aseme ni intended murder mwengine akatae, tafsiri pekee haitoshi.

Kwa nini mmoja aseme ni premeditated murder na mwingine akatae? Well, kwa sababu sheria ni maddeningly subjective. Na tafsiri pekee haitoshi na ndo maana ni muhimu kuzingatia the totality of the circumstances. You don't just look at one deciding factor. You look at everything, the whole picture - facts, contexts, past history, eyewitness accounts, scientific evidence, physical evidence, and etc.

Unatafsiri kwa vifungu na si kichwa chako.

Of course. Duuuuh.

Toa mfano wa mtu asiyesomea sheria aliyetumia tafsiri toka kwenye vifungu vya sheria kama ipasavyo alafu akapingwa.

Sijalielewa vizuri swali lako. Rephrase it.

 

[gfsonwin]

katika fani nisizo zipenda sheria inaongoza sababu kubwa ni kwamba kila mwanasheria huweza kutafsiri kifungo kwa kutumia ubongo wake na akiweza kuujengea hoja basi akashinda.

mbaya zaid reference cases zaweza kutumiwa kwa tafsiri tofauti tofauti na zote zikatoa hukumu tofauti.

kila term inayokuwa defined basi huwa defined kulingana na senario husika na nje ya hapo ile definition sio valid tena.

kimsingi ni fani ambayo inategema zaid uwezo wa mtu kujenga hoja na kuitetea hoja yake, zaid kuliko mantiki husika kwenye jambo husika. kwangu mimi hii ndio fani ya kwanza ambayo ningeweza kusema haihitajk mtu kusoma darasani.

ukitaka kuamini sheria ni usanii msome JOHN GRASHAHAM hasa kwenye street lawyer, utaijua vizuri hii fani

 

[Asnam]

Utamu wa ngoma ingia ucheze,sio kutoa kasoro wakati hata style ya kucheza hujui......mtuache na fani yetu.

 

[Nyani Ngabu]

katika fani nisizo zipenda sheria inaongoza sababu kubwa ni kwamba kila mwanasheria huweza kutafsiri kifungo kwa kutumia ubongo wake na akiweza kuujengea hoja basi akashinda.

Na wakati mwingine wala si mwanasheria anayeshinda kesi. Kwa mfano, zile kesi ambazo huamuliwa na jury. Sawa, kwenye selection huwa kuna mchujo na wale wanaochaguliwa kukaa kwenye jury wanatakiwa wawe open minded.

Lakini mtu anaweza kudanganya kwamba bado haja form opinion yoyote ile dhidi ya mtuhumiwa na kwamba yupo open minded kusikiliza ushahidi utakaotolewa ilhali tayari moyoni mwake anajua atapiga kura ya aina gani.

Sasa nyie wengine mtajuaje kama yeye moyoni mwake tayari anajua atakavyotoa hukumu yake? Sasa hapo itokee upande wa utetezi unashinda kesi - defense counsel wanajizolea ujiko wa kufanya kazi nzuri kumbe wala hawakufanya miujiza yoyote ile. Ni kwamba tu jurors ndo wameamua mtuhumiwa hana hatia na huenda huo uamuzi wao waliufikia kabla hata kesi haijaanza.

Mfano mzuri ni kesi ya OJ Simpson. Jurors waliom-acquit OJ, ukiangalia demographics zao utajua ni kwa nini walifikia uamuzi ule. Lakini, kama hao jurors wangekuwa wote ni wazungu basi uwezekano wa yeye kupatikana na hatia ulikuwa ni mkubwa sana.

Lakini mwisho wa siku defense counsel ndo walijipatia ujiko eti kwa kufanya kazi nzuri. Kwa maoni yangu, hawakufanya kazi nzuri. Jurors (uamuzi wao) ndo uliwafanya waonekane kana kwamba walifanya kazi nzuri. Na jurors hawako impervious to biases and prejudices. They too are human, afterall.

 

[Ngambo Ngali]

Wahenga walisema"" usitukane wakunga na uzazi ungalipo", wengine wakasema "usitukane mamba kabla ya kuvuka mto" Yule aonekanaye kuwa ni mwanasheria njaa ni mkombozi wa wengine wengi kwa kiasi kikuwa sana kwa upande mwingine.

 

[gfsonwin]

Na wakati mwingine wala si mwanasheria anayeshinda kesi. Kwa mfano, zile kesi ambazo huamuliwa na jury. Sawa, kwenye selection huwa kuna mchujo na wale wanaochaguliwa kukaa kwenye jury wanatakiwa wawe open minded.

Lakini mtu anaweza kudanganya kwamba bado haja form opinion yoyote ile dhidi ya mtuhumiwa na kwamba yupo open minded kusikiliza ushahidi utakaotolewa ilhali tayari moyoni mwake anajua atapiga kura ya aina gani.

Sasa nyie wengine mtajuaje kama yeye moyoni mwake tayari anajua atakavyotoa hukumu yake? Sasa hapo itokee upande wa utetezi unashinda kesi - defense counsel wanajizolea ujiko wa kufanya kazi nzuri kumbe wala hawakufanya miujiza yoyote ile. Ni kwamba tu jurors ndo wameamua mtuhumiwa hana hatia na huenda huo uamuzi wao waliufikia kabla hata kesi haijaanza.

Mfano mzuri ni kesi ya OJ Simpson. Jurors waliom-acquit OJ, ukiangalia demographics zao utajua ni kwa nini walifikia uamuzi ule. Lakini, kama hao jurors wangekuwa wote ni wazungu basi uwezekano wa yeye kupatikana na hatia ulikuwa ni mkubwa sana.

Lakini mwisho wa siku defense counsel ndo walijipatia ujiko eti kwa kufanya kazi nzuri. Kwa maoni yangu, hawakufanya kazi nzuri. Jurors (uamuzi wao) ndo uliwafanya waonekane kana kwamba walifanya kazi nzuri. Na jurors hawako impervious to biases and prejudices. They too are human, afterall.

weee NN usinikumbushe kuhusu hawa wazee wa baraza wa hapa bongo..................na hasa kwa zilizoko mahakama ya mwanzo yaani ni ujinga mtupu...............
binafsi huwa naona kesi nyingi sana mahakama ya mwanzo anayeweza kujenga hoja vizuri ndiye mwenye uhakika wa ushindi na tena ukiwa tricky ndo kabisaa unaweza mvuta hakimu upande wako kama vile unavyopmsukuma mlevi. kikubwa hapa kinaangaliwaga unajiteteaje ana unatoaje ushahidi wako basi.

tena hukumu ambazo ndizo refence huwaga na zenyewe zinatafsiriwa tofauti na kila hakimu hivyo hazinaga common stance...................ndo mana mie nasema huu ni usanii tu na umahiri wa mtu kujenga hoja basi.

hata mahabusu walioko rumande ama kwa kukosa dhamana ama kwa kuwa na makosa ambayo ni not bailable hupeana madesa ya jinsi ya kujitetea na kuuliza maswali kwa mlalamikaji kiasi cha kumfanya hata hakimu mwenyewe kupata kigugumizi.

sheria ni utundu tu na uwezo wa kuweza kudefine mambo utakavyo wewe na kujenga hoja juu ya kile unachokidefine

 

[EMT]

weee NN usinikumbushe kuhusu hawa wazee wa baraza wa hapa bongo..................na hasa kwa zilizoko mahakama ya mwanzo yaani ni ujinga mtupu...............
binafsi huwa naona kesi nyingi sana mahakama ya mwanzo anayeweza kujenga hoja vizuri ndiye mwenye uhakika wa ushindi na tena ukiwa tricky ndo kabisaa unaweza mvuta hakimu upande wako kama vile unavyopmsukuma mlevi. kikubwa hapa kinaangaliwaga unajiteteaje ana unatoaje ushahidi wako basi.

tena hukumu ambazo ndizo refence huwaga na zenyewe zinatafsiriwa tofauti na kila hakimu hivyo hazinaga common stance...................ndo mana mie nasema huu ni usanii tu na umahiri wa mtu kujenga hoja basi.

hata mahabusu walioko rumande ama kwa kukosa dhamana ama kwa kuwa na makosa ambayo ni not bailable hupeana madesa ya jinsi ya kujitetea na kuuliza maswali kwa mlalamikaji kiasi cha kumfanya hata hakimu mwenyewe kupata kigugumizi.

sheria ni utundu tu na uwezo wa kuweza kudefine mambo utakavyo wewe na kujenga hoja juu ya kile unachokidefine

Hakuna tofauti kubwa kati ya mtu aliyesomea sheria na yule ambaye hakusomea sheria. In fact, the law says that everyone is presumed to know the law and that ignorance of the law is not a defense.

Wote wako sawa sema tuu kuna baadhi ya wanasheria ambao wanapenda ku-complicate mambo ili waonekane tofauti na wengine.

The only difference seems to be that lawyers know where to find the law, japokuwa maendeleleo ya teknologia yamewezesha hata wale ambao hawajasoma sheria kujua sehemu ya kuipata sheria.

Social worker ambaye hajui children law, family law, community care law, ata-struggle kufanya kazi yake ya kulinda watoto ipasavyo.

Kwa nchi za wenzetu, legal firms wanapenda kuajiri zaidi graduates ambao their first degree was not in law: All degrees welcome: why non-law graduates are in demand for solicitors' jobs : TARGETjobs

Unaweza kukuta issue ndogo tuu ya ku-solve kwa kutumia common sense lakini baadhi ya wanasheria wanai-complicate ili ionekane ni ngumu whilst in fact is not. Badala ya kutumia common sense, logical mind, etc, baadhi yao wana-complicate mambo.

Ndiyo maana Prof Shivji alikuwa analalamika kuwa alikuwa akiwapa wanafunzi wa sheria maswali simple, badala ya kujibu hayo maswali walikuwa wanajitengenezea maswali yao halafu wanashindwa kuyajibu.

Kwa mfano, nimemsoma nameless girl hapo juu akijaribu ku-complicate maana ya "contract" kuwa ni zaidi ya makubaliano.

Yea, there must be an offer and acceptance, consideration, intention to create legal relations, etc, lakini kama yeye ni mwanasheria ni lini mara ya mwisho alienda mahakamani kumtetea au kum-defend mteja ambaye kesi yake ilihusiana na issues za offer and acceptance au consideration?

 

[Nyani Ngabu]

Hakuna tofauti kubwa kati ya mtu aliyesomea sheria na yule ambaye hakusomea sheria. In fact, the law says that everyone is presumed to know the law and that ignorance of the law is not a defense.

Wote wako sawa sema tuu kuna baadhi ya wanasheria ambao wanapenda ku-complicate mambo ili waonekane tofauti na wengine.

The only difference seems to be that lawyers know where to find the law, japokuwa maendeleleo ya teknologia yamewezesha hata wale ambao hawajasoma sheria kujua sehemu ya kuipata sheria.

Social worker ambaye hajui children law, family law, community care law, ata-struggle kufanya kazi yake ya kulinda watoto ipasavyo.

Katika mishe mishe zangu nishakutana na mi-convicted felons inayojua sheria hadi utashangaa mwenyewe. Halafu sasa mingine hata high school haikumaliza.

La msingi zaidi ulilosema ni kujua wapi pa kuipata sheria. Hapo labda mwanasheria anaweza akawa na upper hand ingawa pia kwa siku hizi kama ulivyosema, karibu kila kitu kinapatikana mtandaoni.

Halafu, kwa nchi za wenzetu kuna mijitu (ambayo hata haijasomea sheria) huwa inajitetea yenyewe mahakamani na wakati mwingine hushinda kesi.

 

[gfsonwin]

Hakuna tofauti kubwa kati ya mtu aliyesomea sheria na yule ambaye hakusomea sheria. In fact, the law says that everyone is presumed to know the law and that ignorance of the law is not a defense.

Wote wako sawa sema tuu kuna baadhi ya wanasheria ambao wanapenda ku-complicate mambo ili waonekane tofauti na wengine.

The only difference seems to be that lawyers know where to find the law, japokuwa maendeleleo ya teknologia yamewezesha hata wale ambao hawajasoma sheria kujua sehemu ya kuipata sheria.

Social worker ambaye hajui children law, family law, community care law, ata-struggle kufanya kazi yake ya kulinda watoto ipasavyo.

Kwa nchi za wenzetu, legal firms wanapenda kuajiri zaidi graduates ambao their first degree was not in law: All degrees welcome: why non-law graduates are in demand for solicitors' jobs : TARGETjobs

Unaweza kukuta issue ndogo tuu ya ku-solve kwa kutumia common sense lakini baadhi ya wanasheria wanai-complicate ili ionekane ni ngumu whilst in fact is not. Badala ya kutumia common sense, logical mind, etc, baadhi yao wana-complicate mambo.

Ndiyo maana Prof Shivji alikuwa analalamika kuwa alikuwa akiwapa wanafunzi wa sheria maswali simple, badala ya kujibu hayo maswali walikuwa wanajitengenezea maswali yao halafu wanashindwa kuyajibu.

Kwa mfano, nimemsoma nameless girl hapo juu akijaribu ku-complicate maana ya "contract" kuwa ni zaidi ya makubaliano.

Yea, there must be an offer and acceptance, consideration, intention to create legal relations, etc, lakini kama yeye ni mwanasheria ni lini mara ya mwisho alienda mahakamani kumtetea au kum-defend mteja ambaye kesi yake ilihusiana na issues za offer and acceptance au consideration?

tatizo kubwa la wanasheria ni kwamba wanadhani wao wakicomplicate ndipo watakapoonekana kwamba wanajua vitu kube hakuna kitu...............huwaga siwatofautish na madaktari ambao hudhan udaktari ni ishu8 sana kumbe kila mtu ni dr wa mwili wake kwa nafasi ya kwanza.

kuna wapiga debe tu hapa bongo wanaijua sheria na shule hata form 4 hajafika ila kwa jins alivyokaa gerezani na kushiriki mahakaman anaiimba sheria kama mwl wa sheria.

mimi mwenyewe huwa nasema ukiweza kujitetea kwa hoja zenye mashiko, basi tayari wewe ni mwanasheria wa nafsi yako wa kwanza....................woga tu ndio ujnaosumbua baadhi ya watu, kama msomi alosomea sheria kamzidi mtu mwingine basi ni katika ile hali ya kawaida lkn si kwasababu eti mhuyu asokuwa mwanasheria ni mbumbumbu.

another thing ni kwamba bongo hatuna utaratibu kwa kuresearch kwenye mambo hata ya binafsi tu, iwe library based research ama yyte ile............ingekuwa tunapedna basi watu wengi sana wangekuwa wanajua tu kwa kawaida utaratibu wa mtu kuish kwa nidhamu ukoje na kwamba achukue hatua gani kudai haki yake basi.

 

[gfsonwin]

Katika mishe mishe zangu nishakutana na mi-convicted felons inayojua sheria hadi utashangaa mwenyewe. Halafu sasa mingine hata high school haikumaliza.

La msingi zaidi ulilosema ni kujua wapi pa kuipata sheria. Hapo labda mwanasheria anaweza akawa na upper hand ingawa pia kwa siku hizi kama ulivyosema, karibu kila kitu kinapatikana mtandaoni.

Halafu, kwa nchi za wenzetu kuna mijitu (ambayo hata haijasomea sheria) huwa inajitetea yenyewe mahakamani na wakati mwingine hushinda kesi.

achana na hawa watu ambao mimi huwaita watoto wa vijiweni hawa ni washenzi kabisa kwenye laws na huwa wanajua kujitetea ile mbaya na mara nyingine kesi wanashinda...................

ukitaka kuamini temebelea mahabusu utawaskia na hapa Dar mitaa ya mwembe yanga wamejaa watu ambao ni wa vijiwen na wanaijua sheria kuliko hata haio the so called wanasheria wetu

 

[nameless girl]

Huo uzaidi wa kutafsiri sheria ni upi? Naomba uuelezee kinagaubaga na kwa mifano, tafadhali.



Huo uelewa fulani ndo upi? Naomba nao uuelezee kwa mifano.



Ukoje huo uelewa? Tofauti yake na uelewa mwingine ni nini?



Huo uelewa ukoje? Unaitwaje? Unaweza kunipa mifano mitano?



Uzaidi wake ni nini?



Sasa kama mtu akiisoma hiyo sheria ya mkataba si atavijua hivyo vifungu? Au hivyo vifungu havieleweki katika common parlance hadi uwe " mwanasheria msomi"?

Halafu wewe hapa unazungumzia makubaliano kiujumla mno. Ni nani ambaye anaweza kufikiri mimi na wewe kama tukikubaliana kwenda lunch sehemu itakuwa tumeingia mkataba? Ni juha tu awezaye kudhani hivyo.



Asiyejua ni uvivu wake tu maana hizo sheria nyingi zinapatikana karibu kila sehemu. Kuna vitabu vinavyoelezea hayo (nimeshaviona kadhaa kwenye duka la vitabu la Scholastic), kuna watu wana mablogs yao na huziweka hizo sheria, na kadhalika.



Huo undani ni upi na ukoje?



Basi hata raia wabeba maboksi kama mimi tunaweza kuwa na mitazamo tofauti na wanasheria pia. Kwa hiyo kama ni suala la mitazamo tu, hiyo haimaanishi kwamba mwanasheria ndo ana usemi wa mwisho kuhusu tafsiri maana essence ya tafsiri ni subjective and that's why law is madeningly subjective and not exact science.



I know this already. Na siyo murder tu. Hata rape, child cruelty, child endangerment, etc., etc.,



Ili accused awe murderer? That doesn't make any sense. One can be a murderer and not be accused and one can be accused and not be a murderer. And that's why there are wrongful convictions out there.

Nadhani ulichokuwa unataka kusema ili mtu apatikane na hatia ya kosa kubwa kama la mauaji basi ni lazima ushahidi dhidi yake ukidhi threshold ya beyond a reasonable doubt (which itself is a a highly subjective standard)



Kwa nini mmoja aseme ni premeditated murder na mwingine akatae? Well, kwa sababu sheria ni maddeningly subjective. Na tafsiri pekee haitoshi na ndo maana ni muhimu kuzingatia the totality of the circumstances. You don't just look at one deciding factor. You look at everything, the whole picture - facts, contexts, past history, eyewitness accounts, scientific evidence, physical evidence, and etc.



Of course. Duuuuh.



Sijalielewa vizuri swali lako. Rephrase it.

Unauliza ili kutaka kujua ama kutaka kubishana?

 

[Nyani Ngabu]

Unauliza ili kutaka kujua ama kutaka kubishana?

Ili kujua.

 

[Asprin]

Hakuna tofauti kubwa kati ya mtu aliyesomea sheria na yule ambaye hakusomea sheria. In fact, the law says that everyone is presumed to know the law and that ignorance of the law is not a defense.

Wote wako sawa sema tuu kuna baadhi ya wanasheria ambao wanapenda ku-complicate mambo ili waonekane tofauti na wengine.

The only difference seems to be that lawyers know where to find the law, japokuwa maendeleleo ya teknologia yamewezesha hata wale ambao hawajasoma sheria kujua sehemu ya kuipata sheria.

Social worker ambaye hajui children law, family law, community care law, ata-struggle kufanya kazi yake ya kulinda watoto ipasavyo.

Kwa nchi za wenzetu, legal firms wanapenda kuajiri zaidi graduates ambao their first degree was not in law: All degrees welcome: why non-law graduates are in demand for solicitors' jobs : TARGETjobs

Unaweza kukuta issue ndogo tuu ya ku-solve kwa kutumia common sense lakini baadhi ya wanasheria wanai-complicate ili ionekane ni ngumu whilst in fact is not. Badala ya kutumia common sense, logical mind, etc, baadhi yao wana-complicate mambo.

Ndiyo maana Prof Shivji alikuwa analalamika kuwa alikuwa akiwapa wanafunzi wa sheria maswali simple, badala ya kujibu hayo maswali walikuwa wanajitengenezea maswali yao halafu wanashindwa kuyajibu.

Kwa mfano, nimemsoma nameless girl hapo juu akijaribu ku-complicate maana ya "contract" kuwa ni zaidi ya makubaliano.

Yea, there must be an offer and acceptance, consideration, intention to create legal relations, etc, lakini kama yeye ni mwanasheria ni lini mara ya mwisho alienda mahakamani kumtetea au kum-defend mteja ambaye kesi yake ilihusiana na issues za offer and acceptance au consideration?

Haya, Mgunduziforeva na nameless girl hebu njooni mumsome lawyer mwenzenu....

 

[EMT]

Katika mishe mishe zangu nishakutana na mi-convicted felons inayojua sheria hadi utashangaa mwenyewe. Halafu sasa mingine hata high school haikumaliza.

La msingi zaidi ulilosema ni kujua wapi pa kuipata sheria. Hapo labda mwanasheria anaweza akawa na upper hand ingawa pia kwa siku hizi kama ulivyosema, karibu kila kitu kinapatikana mtandaoni.

Halafu, kwa nchi za wenzetu kuna mijitu (ambayo hata haijasomea sheria) huwa inajitetea yenyewe mahakamani na wakati mwingine hushinda kesi.

Wanasema nobody know your case better than yourself.

Nafikiri hapa kwetu bado watu wengi wanawaona wanasheria kama "gods" vile.

Hii imetokana na wanasheria wengi kutowa-empower wateja wao, wakitegemea watarudi tena kama wakikumbwa na tatizo hilo hilo.

Nimesikia hata baadhi ya wanasiasa wakisema kuwa wanawakilishwa na "wakili msomi" kiasi cha kujiuliza mawakili ambao siyo wasomi ndiyo wapi hao?

Lakini husikii watu wakisema kuwa wametibiwa na "daktari msomi", wamefundishwa na "mwalimu msoni".

Sheria is a profession just like other professions. Siku hizi kila mtu anaweza kusomea sheria kama akitaka.

Siyo kama enzi hizo ambapo legal profession was for the wealthy and powerful aristocracy.

Kwa wale ambao bado wanadai kuwa law is a noble profession based on the modern understanding of the word "noble", basi hata kazi ya ulinzi inaweza kuwa ni noble profession.

Maana the modern meaning ya kuwa noble ni kuonyesha au kuwa na high qualities of moral character.

Just like a lawyer, a medical doctor, a social worker, an economist, Kifimbo Cheza:smile-big:, etc, a security guard can also have high qualities of moral character.

 

[nameless girl]

Huo uzaidi wa kutafsiri sheria ni upi? Naomba uuelezee kinagaubaga na kwa mifano, tafadhali.



Huo uelewa fulani ndo upi? Naomba nao uuelezee kwa mifano.



Ukoje huo uelewa? Tofauti yake na uelewa mwingine ni nini?



Huo uelewa ukoje? Unaitwaje? Unaweza kunipa mifano mitano?



Uzaidi wake ni nini?



Sasa kama mtu akiisoma hiyo sheria ya mkataba si atavijua hivyo vifungu? Au hivyo vifungu havieleweki katika common parlance hadi uwe " mwanasheria msomi"?

Halafu wewe hapa unazungumzia makubaliano kiujumla mno. Ni nani ambaye anaweza kufikiri mimi na wewe kama tukikubaliana kwenda lunch sehemu itakuwa tumeingia mkataba? Ni juha tu awezaye kudhani hivyo.



Asiyejua ni uvivu wake tu maana hizo sheria nyingi zinapatikana karibu kila sehemu. Kuna vitabu vinavyoelezea hayo (nimeshaviona kadhaa kwenye duka la vitabu la Scholastic), kuna watu wana mablogs yao na huziweka hizo sheria, na kadhalika.



Huo undani ni upi na ukoje?



Basi hata raia wabeba maboksi kama mimi tunaweza kuwa na mitazamo tofauti na wanasheria pia. Kwa hiyo kama ni suala la mitazamo tu, hiyo haimaanishi kwamba mwanasheria ndo ana usemi wa mwisho kuhusu tafsiri maana essence ya tafsiri ni subjective and that's why law is madeningly subjective and not exact science.



I know this already. Na siyo murder tu. Hata rape, child cruelty, child endangerment, etc., etc.,



Ili accused awe murderer? That doesn't make any sense. One can be a murderer and not be accused and one can be accused and not be a murderer. And that's why there are wrongful convictions out there.

Nadhani ulichokuwa unataka kusema ili mtu apatikane na hatia ya kosa kubwa kama la mauaji basi ni lazima ushahidi dhidi yake ukidhi threshold ya beyond a reasonable doubt (which itself is a a highly subjective standard)



Kwa nini mmoja aseme ni premeditated murder na mwingine akatae? Well, kwa sababu sheria ni maddeningly subjective. Na tafsiri pekee haitoshi na ndo maana ni muhimu kuzingatia the totality of the circumstances. You don't just look at one deciding factor. You look at everything, the whole picture - facts, contexts, past history, eyewitness accounts, scientific evidence, physical evidence, and etc.



Of course. Duuuuh.



Sijalielewa vizuri swali lako. Rephrase it.

Sikubase kwenye mifano ya oral contract kama unavyodhani.
Tukiongelea wananchi, asilimia kubwa sana ya watanzania hawapendi kusoma. Achilia mbali vitabu vya hadithi, hivyo vya sheria wanaviogopa kama ukoma. Unadhani mwananchi huyo atakaa akijisumbua kujua sheria ilhali kuna wanasheria waliosomea hayo?

 

[Nyani Ngabu]

Nimesikia hata baadhi ya wanasiasa wakisema kuwa wanawakilishwa na "wakili msomi" kiasi cha kujiuliza mawakili ambao siyo wasomi ndiyo wapi hao?

Hata mimi huwa najiuliza sana hilo swali. I just don't get it. And it actually makes them come across as haughty aristocrats.

Lakini husikii watu wakisema kuwa wametibiwa na "daktari msomi", wamefundishwa na "mwalimu msoni".

Au mhasibu msomi, mhandisi msomi, karani msomi, na kadhalika.

Sheria is a profession just like other professions. Siku hizi kila mtu anaweza kusomea sheria kama akitaka.

Halafu kuna mtu humu bila hata chembe ya haya akaja kudai eti ualimu siyo profession na kwamba hapa duniani profession ni tatu tu: sheria, udaktari, na uchungaji. I really hope that guy who said that is not a lawyer for real.

Kwa wale ambao bado wanadai kuwa law is a noble profession based on the modern understanding of the word "noble", basi hata kazi ya ulinzi inaweza kuwa ni noble profession.

Maana the modern meaning ya kuwa noble ni kuonyesha au kuwa na high qualities of moral character.

Just like a lawyer, a medical doctor, a social worker, an economist, Kifimbo Cheza, etc, a security guard can also have high qualities of moral character.

Tell them. Maana tukisema sisi wabeba maboksi tunakashifiwa eti akili zetu haziko timamu.

 

[nameless girl]

Haya, Mgunduziforeva na nameless girl hebu njooni mumsome lawyer mwenzenu....

Kwani huyu ni mwanasheria sasa.
Sijui katokea wapi kwanza....