[wanabidii] A big lie about our union

A big lie about our union

President Jakaya Kikwete greets other union leaders at the National Stadium on December 9, 2010 when Mainland Tanzania marked 49 years of Independence. Picture: Courtesy of Full Shnagwe blog.   Mobhare Matinyi, Washington DC  The Citizen, Tanzania Thursday, 27 September 2012 As Judge Joseph Warioba's Constitutional Review Commission continues gathering people's views on the new constitution of the United Republic of Tanzania, some anti-unionists have found a forum to air their outright lie regarding the meaning and the future of our 48-year union. As known, sometime in 1925 Adolph Hitler said in his famous book, Mein Kampf, which literally means, 'My Struggle' that, "If you repeat a lie many times, people are bound to start believing it." Surely, a section of Tanzanians in Zanzibar have bought a lie into their minds without fully understanding its intent, meaning, and implications because of the heavily pumped detestation of the union perpetrated by anti-unionists for decades. The newly circulated argument that ours is a constitutional union and that some Zanzibaris want a union under a treaty is one of the biggest lies ever told by a Tanzanian to fellow Tanzanians. Sensibly, whether looking from a legal or political perspective, there is neither a constitutional union nor a union under a treaty. In international law, a treaty, agreement, protocol, or a convention is what makes a union while a constitution is simply the highest law of the land. The truth is, the proponents of this deceptive rhetoric are simply secessionists who seek pleasing language to terminate the Union while at the same time looking for a safe haven for the fragile sovereign state of Zanzibar in the event the Union falls apart in its entirety because partly the union is already gone. That's it! What is a constitution? It is the most fundamental law that guides a community, which in our case is the United Republic of Tanzania. Pragmatically, a constitution is consent between rulers and the ruled on how a country should be run, which means a nation-state precedes its constitution. Now, how can we have a constitutional union while in its actuality a constitution is the instrument that simply runs a nation? But what is a union? How many types of unions do we have in the world? A union is a complete unification of two or more sovereign states to form a single sovereign state, which entails the cessation of the former sovereignties although their executives, legislatures and judiciaries may continue to function under the newly formed sovereign state. In reality, a union may have one government under a unitary system like the Germans adopted under the Unification Treaty in 1990, or may choose to have a federation, which requires the continuation of the previous governments and establishment of a new federal government as is the case in the United States of America and the United Arab Emirates. Tanzania is neither a unitary state nor a federation because our founding fathers, for what appeared to be good reasons back then, chose to have a two-government system with the union government managing the Mainland, and not vice versa, a reason why currently Zanzibaris work in the government that rules Mainland Tanzania in all levels from vice president to police constables. Candidly, Zanzibar, which enjoys enormous autonomy, is the main beneficiary of the union in every aspect despite a few problems. The Tanzanian system is not unique as some misinformed people claim. The United Kingdom is a union of four countries with four governments since the union government rules England while Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland have their own. Clearly, all unions have two things in common, i.e. a treaty and a constitution. Hence, arguing that there is another union under a treaty is meaningless; nevertheless in 1964 our leaders signed a treaty called the Articles of Union, the legal instrument that created this union. Now, what is the logic of this talk about a new type of union, which is neither a unitary nor a federation, not even a confederacy based on their demands? An argument that the European Union is an example of this strange thing is a big laugh. The EU has no single sovereignty, was formed by the Maastricht Treaty in 1993, and has its constitution. Likewise, the Sirte Declaration of 1999 created the African Union with its Constitutive Act. Both, the EU and the AU have treaties and constitutions. So, are we going to have a bogus union as demanded by the secessionists inside another imaginary African union? What about the dream of the East African Federation? What anti-unionists in Zanzibar want is simply the break-up of the union but keep some parasitic relationship with Mainland Tanzania for the survival of Zanzibar. Our comrades want to eat their cake and have it, that is, the marriage is bad but the romantic relationship for the survival of the weaker side is acceptable! Yes, we have the right to discuss the future of our Union, but deceptive rhetoric won't help. The truth is sacred, and honestly, that type of a union does not exist.

SOURCE: http://www.thecitizen.co.tz/editorial-analysis/47-columnists/26086-a-big-lie-about-our-union

Share this :

• Digg
• Linkedin
• Stumbleupon
• Delicious
• Tumblr
• BufferApp
• Pocket
• Evernote