Zitto Kabwe: Mahakama imetoa uamuzi kuwa Rais John Magufuli alivunja Katiba alipomuondoa Prof. Mussa Assad kama CAG

Kwani hilo na yule aliemuandikia Barua Ndugai ajiuzulu yana tofauti gani? Si yaleyale tu? Ata kwenye vyaka vyetu yapo, sawa tu na kufukuzwa kwa kina Prof Kitila Mkumbo. Kama ni hivi tuna vichaa wengi sana.
 
Kama ni kweli mahakama imetoa hukumu hiyo ,Itakua Jambo zuri kwa uhai wa Sheria zetu na kuweka kumbukumbu vizuri .kwani hata mkubwa anaweza kuwa hatari kwa uvunjifu wa Sheria za nchi.naomba kipengele cha kutokushtakiwa kwa baadhi ya watu kiondolewe Ili watanzania wote wawe sawa mbele ya sheria
 
econonist said:
Kuna haki Assad atapewa maana aliondolewa kimakosa.
Click to expand...
Pamoja na haki hiyo kwa Prof lakini bado maamuzi ya hii kesi hayana impact kwenye taifa kiujumla.
Mfano mdogo katiba inaruhusu mikutano ya hadhara na maandamano ya amani lakini haifanyiki. Je, hapa katiba haijavunjwa? Na kama imevunjwa nini msimamo wa mahakama hii leo tunayoiita ipo huru baada ya kutoa maamuzi yanayofurahisha machoni.
 
Lilikuwa jitu la hovyo sana, ushamba ni mzigo mkubwa sana, na ma PhD feki ameyajaza nyumbani kwake, na anashangilia akiitwa dokta, konyo kabisa huyu
 

Soma hukumu

Court name
High Court of Tanzania
Registry
High Court Dar es Salaam Main Registry
Case number
Misc. Cause 8 of 2022

Zitto Zuberi Kabwe vs the President of the United Republic of Tanzania & Others (Misc. Cause 8 of 2022) [2022] TZHC 14947 (05 December 2022);​

Media neutral citation
[2022] TZHC

144 (1) Bila kuathiri masharti mengine yaliyomo katika ibara hii. Mdhibiti na Mkaguzi Mkuu wa Hesabu wa Jamhuri ya Muungano atalazimika kuacha kazi yake atakapotimiza umri wa miaka sitini au umri mwingine wowote utakaotajwa na Sheria iliyotungwa na Bunge.

(2) Mdhibiti na Mkaguzi Mkuu wa Hesabu aweza tukuondolewa katika madaraka ya kazi yake kwa sababu ya kushindwa kutekeleza kazi zake (ama kutokaria ha maradhi au sababu nyingine yoyote) au kwa sababu ya tabia mbaya, au kwa kuvunja masharti ya sheria ya Maadili ya Viongozi wa Umma na hataweza kuondolewa kazini kwa mujibu wa masharti ya ibara ndogo ya (4) ya ibara hii.

(3) Iwapo Rais anaona kwamba suala la kumwondoa kazini Mdhibiti na Mkaguzi Mkuu wa Hesabu kwa mujibu wa masharti ya ibara hii inahitaji kuchunguzwa, basi katika haii hiyo mambo yatakuwa ifuatavyo:

(a) Rais atateua Tume Maalum ambayo itakuwa na Mwenyekiti na Wajumbe wengine wasiopungua wawili. Huyo Mwenyekiti na angalau nusu ya wajumbe wengine wa Tume hiyo itabidi wawe watu ambao ni Majaji au watu waliopata kuwa Majaji wa Mahakama Kuu au Mahakama ya Rufani katika nchi yoyote iliyomo kwenye Jumuiya ya Madoia;

(b) Tume hiyo itachunguza shauri lote halafu itatoa taarifa kwa Rais kuhusu maelezo ya shauri Iote na itamshauri Rais kama huyo Mdhibiti na Mkaguzi Mkuu wa Hesabu aondolewe kazini kwa mujibu wa masharti ya ibara hii kwa sababu ya kushindwa kufanyakazi kutokana na maradhi au sababu nyingine yoyote au kwa sababu ya tabia mbaya.

(4) Ikiwa Tume iliyoteuiiwa kwa mujibu wa masharti ya ibara ndogo ya (3) itamshauri Rais kwamba huyo Mdhibiti na Mkaguzi Mkuu wa Hesabu aondolewe kazini kwa sababu ya kushindwa kufanya kazi kutokana na maradhi au sababu nyingine yoyote au kwa sababu ya tabia mbaya, basi Rais atamwondoa kazini.

(5) Ikiwa suala la kumwondoa kazini Mdhibiti na Mkaguzi Mkuu wa Hesabu limepelekwa kwenye Tume kwa ajili ya uchunguzi kwa mujibu wa masharti ya ibara hii, Rais aweza kumsimamisha kazi huyo Mdhibiti' na Mkaguzi Mkuu wa Hesabu, na Rais aweza wakati wowote kufuta uamuzi huo wa kumsimamisha kazi, na kwa hali yoyote uamuzi huo utabadilika ikiwa Tume itamshauri Rais kwamba huyo Mdhibiti na Mkaguzi Mkuu wa Hesabu asiondoiewe kazini.

(6) Mtu ambaye ni Mdhibiti na Mkaguzi Mkuu wa Hesabu au aliyepata kuwa Mdhibiti na Mkaguzi Mkuu wa Hesabu hawezi kuteuliwa kushika au kushikilia madaraka ya kazi nyingine yoyote katika utumishi wa Serikali ya Jamhuri ya Muungano.

(7) Masharti ya ibara hii hayatatumika kwa mtu yoyote aliyeteuliwa kuwa Kaimu Mdhibiti na Mkaguzi Mkuu wa Hesabu. (Emphasis is ours)


..... We were not told a legitimate purpose that the provision and the removal of the fourth respondent from the office save. We were similarly not told how article 30(2) would save the impugned provision and the removal of the fourth respondent from the office which are violative of article 144(1) of the Constitution. We nonetheless do not see any lawful object which was intended to be achieved by the provision, other than introducing a criterion of ensuring removal of the CAG from the office on expiry of the fixed term of five years contrary to the provision of article 144 and the security of tenure of the CAG guaranteed under the Constitution.In the light of what we have discussed with regard to the saving provision of article 30(2) of the Constitution, we are satisfied and we so hold that neither section 6(1) of the Public Audit Act nor the act of the removal of the fourth respondent from the office is saved by and falls within the purview of article 30(2) of the Constitution.When all is said and done, we considered the reliefs sought by the petitioner in the light of the foregoing findings and conclusions. Since we have found section 6(1) of the Public Audit Act and the removal of the fourth respondent from the office by the first respondent to be unconstitutional for violating article 144(1) of the Constitution, we are inclined to make appropriate declarations to that effect. As to the appointment of the third respondent into the office, we are satisfied that we cannot in the circumstances hold that the appointment was unconstitutional for reasons very well stated herein above, which would also cater for our resolve to decline to hold that the fourth respondent is the substantive holder of the office of the CAG.In the upshot of the foregoing reasons and findings, the petition fails in the issue of the appointment of the third respondent in which case we decline to hold ....


the appointment of the third respondent is unconstitutional, and we in the same way decline to hold that the fourth respondent is a substantive holder of the office of the CAG. It also fails in other issues implied from the reliefs which we did not expressly mention here. However, the petition is allowed in respect of unconstitutionality of the provision of section 6(1) of the Public Audit Act and the unconstitutionality of the removal of the fourth respondent from the office of the CAG pursuant to section 6(1) of the Public Audit Act before attaining the age of sixty five years. We so hold because the provision of section 6(1) and the removal of the fourth respondent from the office are all violative of article 144(1) of the Constitution. Consequently, the provision of section 6(1) of the Public Audit Act, No. 11 of 2008 is in terms of article 64(5) of the Constitution herein declared null and void and is hereby struck out forthwith from the Public Audit Act, No. 11 of 2008. We make no order as to costs as the petition was conducted as a public interest litigation.It is so ordered.DATED and DELIVERED at Dar es Salaam this 5th day of December, 2022

Signed : B.S Masoud
Judge

Signed : J.L Masabo
Judge

Signed : E.E Kakolaki
Judge

Source : Zitto Zuberi Kabwe vs the President of the United Republic of Tanzania & Others (Misc. Cause 8 of 2022) [2022] TZHC 14947 (05 December 2022); | Tanzlii
 
Kwa hiyo wote hawastahili kutuongoza maana woote wanatumia Akili za kuambiwa na wazungu!

Sijawahi Ona kiongozi wa upinzani mwenye hoja wa kizazi hiki tangu walipoondoka kina prof Baregu na Dk Slaa!

Hawa wa sasa ni makapi tupu!

Ebu fikiria taasisi Makini unaweza Mpa mtu kama Pambalu kuongoza hub ya chama yaani vijana?

Au hao CCM-Asali na wapaka Mikororogo wenye uteuzi wa kutia Shaka?

Tunaongozwa pande zote na opportunist tupu!

Woote wezi tupu!

Ila umamluki ni janga zaidi.
 
Kuna watu washenzi sana. Yani likimburu linakaa kumzungumzia mtu ambae tayali ashafariki. Anashindwa kupambana na hali na wakati tulonao sasa mgumu linakaa kuongea asubui jion mchana kama vile mdomo wake ulilambwa na mbwa.
 
Tony Laurent said:
Kwani hii kesi/shauri lilifunguliwa lini? Kama lilifunguliwa baada kifo cha mwendazake basi huu utakuwa ni unafiki. Kama ilifunguliwa kabla ya kifo, basi nafuta kauli yangu ya unafiki.
Click to expand...
Shauri lilifunguliwa Magufuli akiwa hai, ila naona mahakama iliamua kupiga danadana kwa hofu, maana hakuna ambaye anafahamu yule bwana angamtenda nini jaji ambaye angeamua kutoa uamuzi sahihi.
 
Mwanzo mzuri kwa Zitto, hongera kwake. Lakini namshauri asiishie hapo, kama kweli anajiona amekuwa mtetezi wa Katiba basi namtaka kesho arudi tena mahakamani kumfungulia Samia kesi yake kwa kupinga kwake kufanyika mikutano ya siasa kinyume cha Katiba.

Akifanya hivi ndio nitakuwa na imani nae, kinyume na hapo ameamua kujikosha tu kwa kumtumia Magufuli kwa manufaa yake kisiasa, sitachelewa kumuita mnafiki.
 
Ukiona tu kiongozi anapenda kuwaxiba midomo wananchi, tambua kuwa kiongozi huyo ni mwovu kupindukia.
 
Lovelovie said:
Kuna watu washenzi sana. Yani likimburu linakaa kumzungumzia mtu ambae tayali ashafariki. Anashindwa kupambana na hali na wakati tulonao sasa mgumu linakaa kuongea asubui jion mchana kama vile mdomo wake ulilambwa na mbwa.
Click to expand...
Mahaba yanawafanya kila jambo mchukulie TOO PERSONAL...

Hiyo haikuwa kesi dhidi ya John Pombe Magufuli bali ni kesi dhidi ya Rais wa Jamhuri ya Muungano wa Tanzania.

Ingawaje Rais husika ameshafariki lakini hukumu hii itatumika kama dira kwa marais wengine watakaofuata au aliye madarakani!!

Ni hukumu itakayoendelea kutumika kama reference kwa miaka mingine hata 1000 ijayo unless ibara husika ya katiba na kifungu cha sheria vibadilishwe!
 
Bams said:
Shauri lilifunguliwa Magufuli akiwa hai, ila naona mahakama iliamua kupiga danadana kwa hofu, maana hakuna ambaye anafahamu yule bwana angamtenda nini jaji ambaye angeamua kutoa uamuzi sahihi.
Click to expand...
Ni kweli sidhani kama yupo jaji angehukumu hii kesi kwa usahihi. Miaka ile mitano ilikuwa migumu sana kwa nchi hii.
 
Bams said:
Shauri lilifunguliwa Magufuli akiwa hai, ila naona mahakama iliamua kupiga danadana kwa hofu, maana hakuna ambaye anafahamu yule bwana angamtenda nini jaji ambaye angeamua kutoa uamuzi sahihi.
Click to expand...
Are you sure of this?

Hii case imepewa namba 8/2022 maana yake imefunguliwa Samia akiwa madarakani, ulichoandika hapo juu kuwa ilifunguliwa Magufuli akiwa madarakani sio kweli.

Simply, Zitto alisubiri mpaka mama yake aingie madarakani ndio akafungue hiyo kesi, ndio maana sasa namtaka kama kweli Zitto sio mnafiki, kuna kesi nyingine Samia anavunja Katiba kwa kuzuia mikutano ya kisiasa, na yeye akiwa kama mdau, hivyo pia namshauri akamshtaki Samia.
 
Em na we nae punguza kisedemnede
 
Meela said:
Magufuli aliamua kutoongeza mkataba wa Asaad. Sheria ilimruhusu kufanya hayo. Leo mahakama inasema ile sheria inapingana na katiba. Sheria yenyewe iliwekwa kabla Magufuli hajawa rais wa JMT. Sasa hapo Magufuli ana kosa gani?
Click to expand...
Kiongozi mwenye dhamira njema, kabla ya sheria, anazingatia katiba. Mtu mwovu kama alivyokuwa marehemu, wakati wote anatafuta mwanya utakaomwezesha kutenda uovu.

Magufuli alimwondoa Asad baada ya report yake iliyoonesha utawala wa Magufuli ulikuwa amepora 2.4 trillion. Hiyo pesa mpaka leo haijawekwa wazi ilikopelekwa japo kuna tetesi zenye nguvu zinazoeleza kuwa alienda kuzificha Canada, akitumia mwanya wa kununua ndege.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…