Anne Makinda.The decision by
the Constituent Assembly (CA) to have every delegate sworn in
individually has elicited mixed reaction from academicians and
activists.
A cross-section of activists that spoke to The
Citizen in subsequent interviews said spending a whole three days just
to swear in delegates was sheer misuse of taxpayers’ money and waste of
time that would have been better used in debating the Draft
Constitution.
There was a fierce debate between two opposing
sides in the debating chamber with some backing the committee of the
Draft Standing Orders led by Prof Costa Mahalu that members take the
oath in groups. Others, though, opposed the decision, saying an oath
ought to be regarded as a personal commitment made before God.
But the coordinator of Tanzania Human Rights
Defenders Coalition (THRDC), Mr Onesmo Olengurumwa, said taking the oath
was not about prayers; it is just a routine that doesn’t merit much
time and cost. “We have witnessed various high profile officials taking
the oath each year but they behave differently and even go ahead to defy
the Constitution that they had sworn to protect,’’ he said.
His sentiments were echoed by the executive
director of a health advocacy group, Sikika, Mr Irenei Kiria, who said
despite being sworn in on various occasions many leaders remained
selfish and acted against the laws governing the country.
“There is a lot of corruption and impunity in the
country and it appears that many suspects in these scandals took an oath
before assuming their offices,’’ Mr Kiria said, advising that the best
option was to have members sworn-in in groups like it is done with
medical professionals, lawyers and members of the uniformed forces.
On Tuesday, the chairman of the Draft Standing
Orders Committee, Prof Mahalu, told the assembly that his team suggested
that members take the oath in three groups, after considering the cost
of swearing in more than 620 members one by one, adding that the
exercise could take at least three days, meaning three days during which
CA members would be paid allowances only for attending the swearing in
ceremony.
He said the committee suggested that members take
oath in three groups, namely those of Muslims, Christians and
non-believers. A University of Dar es Salaam lecturer, Dr Bakar
Mohammed, said taking the oath was not more important than debating the
Second Draft Constitution.
“If they found it to be that important, I think
they should have opted for swearing in an affidavit which is the easiest
way as it is done in the courts of law,’’ argued the lecturer.
A lecturer at the Open University of Tanzania
(OUT), Mr Emmanuel Mallya, said never mind the fact that already more
than 15 days have been lost before commencement any debate on the Draft
Constitution.
Tanzania Constitution Forum (TCF) chariman Deus
Kibamba was skeptical though, that there was a lot of arguments from
both sides on how members should take tha oath but he scoffed at
delegates he said wanted to be seen by their relatives outside the
assembly that they were participating in the historic event.
Some CA members who want delegates to be sworn in
collectively to save time and money include Mr Freeman Mbowe who is also
the leader of the official opposition in parliament and Mr Ally Keisy
(Nkasi North- CCM), who said taking the oath in groups would save the
government over Sh550 million.
0 comments:
Post a Comment