Democracy in Tanzania Elections. Critical Analysis of the Legal and Institutional Framework

Overview of the Electoral Process in Tanzania

Research Paper (undergraduate) , 2017 , 62 Pages

Law - Public Law / Constitutional Law / Basic Rights

Most aspects of human life are dependent on the political make up of the state and
the contemporary world has put into priority democratic forms of government as it
allows the followers to have a dictative power to determine who to rule over them
and under which standards the leader should conduct his reign. For that porpose
democratic elections were introduced in The United Republic of Tanzania.
For the purpose of ensuring democratic elections, laws are enacted and put into force
both at the municipal and international levels. Also, electoral management bodies are
established by the laws to execute the purpose in all democratic elections. In
Tanzania two bodies act for the purpose as establised by the Constitutions inforce
therein. The bodies are the National Electoral and Zanzibar Electoral Commissions
(NEC and ZEC). The core principle governing the powers and operations of these
commissions are independence and impartiality and the elections executed in
complience with the principles are deemed free and fair (just), this is tested by the
electoral stakeholders through their post electoral views and commentaries.
Generally, the study is about the independence and impartiality of the commissions
as to secure confidence of the public in their dealings so as to realise democratic
elections in the state.
The study is made up of five chapters as follows: Chapter one covers the background
information, research problem, research objectives, and research methodology.
Chapter two explains the conceptual framework covering the operational meanings
of key words concepts and the perspectives of various levels of the universe on
democratic elections. Chapter three provides the legal and institutional frameworks,
while Chapter four dwells on analysis and presentation of findings of the study. The
last chapter provides the conclusion and proposes recommendations to curb the
researched problem.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

DEDICATION

LIST OF STATUTES

LIST OF INTERNATIONAL AND REGIONAL INSTRUMENTS

ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS

ABSTRACT

TABLE OF CONTENTS

CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION
1.1 Introduction
1.2 Background
1.3 Statement of the problem
1.4 Hypothesis
1.5 Objectives of the study
1.5.1 General objective
1.5.2 Specific objectives
1.6 Significance of the study
1.7 Literature review
1.8 Research methodology
1.8.1 Primary data collection
1.8.1.1 Interviews
1.8.1.2 Questionnaires
1.8.2 Secondary data collection
1.9.0 Population and sampling design
1.9.1 Unit of inquiry
1.9.2 Sample size
1.9.3 Sampling technique
1.10 Data analysis technique
1.11 Scope of the study/ limitation
1.12 Conclusion

CHAPTER TWO
THE PARADOX OF DEMOCRACY AND DEMOCRATIC ELECTIONS
2.1 Introduction
2.2 The concept of democracy
2.3 The concept of election
2.4 The concept of democratic election
2.5 The international perspective of Democracy and Democratic Elections
2.6 The international principles of democratic elections
2.7 The regional perspective of Democracy and Democratic Elections
2.8 The principles of democratic elections in the URT
2.9 Conclusion

CHAPTER THREE
LEGAL AND INSTITUTIONAL FRAMEWORKS ON TANZANIA ELECTIONS
3.1 Introduction
3.2 The Electoral legal framework in the URT
3.2.1 The Constitution of the United Republic of Tanzania
3.2.1.1 Direct effect
3.2.1.2 Indirect effect
3.2.2 The National Elections Act
3.2.3 The Political Parties Act
3.2.4 The Constitution of the Revolutionary Government of Zanzibar
3.2.5 The Zanzibar Elections Act
3.2.6 The Election Expenses Act
3.3 Weaknesses of the electoral legal framework
3.4 The electoral institutional framework in the URT
3.4.1 The National Electoral Commission
3.4.2 Zanzibar Electoral Commission
3.5 Weaknesses of the electoral institutional framework
3.6 Conclusion

CHAPTER FOUR
DATA PRESENTATION, ANALYSIS AND DISCUSSION
4.1 Reasons for loss of confidence in the electoral commissions
4.1.1 Introduction
4.1.2 Biasness
4.1.3 Delay of election results declaration
4.1.4 None challenge-ability of the declared presidential results
4.1.5 Mishandling of voters registration
4.1.5.1 None registration of eligible voters
4.1.5.2 Existence of ghost voters
4.1.6 Poor mechanism used to execute elections
4.1.7 Active membership of commissioners in political parties
4.2 Impacts
4.2.1 Loss of confidence on the electoral commissions
4.2.2 Denial of the right to vote
4.2.3 Political instability
4.2.4 Taking the law into ones hand
4.2.5 Increase of election petitions in the courts of law
4.3 Conclusion

CHAPTER FIVE
SUMMARY, CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
5.1 Introduction
5.2 Summary
5.3 Conclusion
5.4 Recommendations

REFERENCES

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

This work has been an accomplishment due to material and moral support from various people whom I would like to call them The Greatest People I know. I would like to air my compliments and gratitude to The Almighty GOD for the gifts of life, strength and intelligence, the parents he gave me and the people I have around me.

This work would not have been if not by the close supervision of Mr. Martin Massawe whose guidance has played the key role in the completion of the entire work. He keenly made his constructive criticisms and comments wherever necessary which enabled me to come out with this research report. Together with Mr. D. T Msabilla as the editor of this work. My compliments and gratitude to them.

My further compliments and gratitude to my Late Mother Ms. Elda Abella Buberwa (Mrs Shubi Kalembo) for she devoted her precious time and resources for our family’s life and education and the belief she had in me, she will always live in my mind. May her soul rest in peace. Also my compliments to Ms. Prisca Nchimbi, Ms. Elvira Emmanuel Nsangila, my family, friends and all other persons who have played a vital role and supported this work in one way or the other.

Finally, I would like to thank the Government of the United Republic of Tanzania for the peace, harmony, and the facilities it has tried to provide for the education of we its people.

DEDICATION

I dedicate this work to my young brothers and young sisters, Francis Kalembo, Julieth William and others and all Tanzanians dedicating their efforts to the prosperity of the United Republic of Tanzania.

LIST OF STATUTES

The Constitution of the United Republic of Tanzania of 1977 as amended from time to time

The Constitution of Zanzibar Cap of 1984 R.E 2010

The National Elections Act cap 343 R.E (2010) The Zanzibar Election Act No 11 R.E (2004)

The Election Expenses Act of ( 2010)

The Political Parties Act, of 1992 R.E (2015)

The Elections Act, No.1 of (1985)

The Election Amendment Act, Cap 13 of (1990)

The Kenya Constitution R.E (2010)

The Help America Vote Act of (2002)

LIST OF INTERNATIONAL AND REGIONAL INSTRUMENTS

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) Treaty of 1948

AU Charter on Democracy Elections and Governance of 2004

The Union’s Declaration on the Principles Governing Democratic Elections in Africa of 2002

SADC Principles and Guidelines Governing Democratic Elections. R.E (2015) EAC Principles for Election Observation and Evaluation Treaty of 1999 R.E 2007

Treaty for the Establishment of The East African Community Treaty of 2012

ABBREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS

Abbildung in dieser Leseprobe nicht enthalten

ABSTRACT

Most aspects of human life are dependent on the political make up of the state and the contemporary world has put into priority democratic forms of government as it allows the followers to have a dictative power to determine who to rule over them and under which standards the leader should conduct his reign. For that porpose democratic elections were introduced in The United Republic of Tanzania.

For the purpose of ensuring democratic elections, laws are enacted and put into force both at the municipal and international levels. Also, electoral management bodies are established by the laws to execute the purpose in all democratic elections. In Tanzania two bodies act for the purpose as establised by the Constitutions inforce therein. The bodies are the National Electoral and Zanzibar Electoral Commissions (NEC and ZEC). The core principle governing the powers and operations of these commissions are independence and impartiality and the elections executed in complience with the principles are deemed free and fair (just), this is tested by the electoral stakeholders through their post electoral views and commentaries. Generally, the study is about the independence and impartiality of the commissions as to secure confidence of the public in their dealings so as to realise democratic elections in the state.

The study is made up of five chapters as follows: Chapter one covers the background information, research problem, research objectives, and research methodology. Chapter two explains the conceptual framework covering the operational meanings of key words concepts and the perspectives of various levels of the universe on democratic elections. Chapter three provides the legal and institutional frameworks, while Chapter four dwells on analysis and presentation of findings of the study. The last chapter provides the conclusion and proposes recommendations to curb the researched problem.

CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND INFORMATION

1.1 Introduction

The contemporary world has obviously manifested the demand of adherence to the principles of democracy in all aspects of life, but it seems the demand is higher in political matters. It is a common knowledge that once democracy is denied then injustice is calling. Seeing its indispensability most states have incorporated provisions for assurance of democracy in their laws of the land, the example is Tanzania where democracy is provided under Article 8 of the Constitution of the United Republic of Tanzania (CURT)¹ and Article 5 of Constitution of the Revolutionary Government of Zanzibar (CRGZ)². Furthermore, the mentioned mother laws provide for the substantive aspects and the procedural aspects of laws relating to democracy in general elections. However, the issue of democracy in Tanzania is a bit still young as it is now 24 years old. In its early stages there was a requirement that for a person demanding to enforce democracy in case it is claimed to have been breached in the elections then a fee of 5 million was ought to be paid in the court of law as per section 111(2) of the National elections Act³, this was challenged later.

The challenge was in the case of Julius Ishengoma Francis Ndyanabo v. The Attorney General⁴ which is a court of appeal case appealed from the High court whereby the petitioner had an issue on the constitutionality of section 111(2) of the Elections Act⁵ which demanded a fee of Tsh 5 million as fee to file an election case in the court of law on the ground that it barred access to justice contrary to Article 13(1), (2) and 6(a) of the CURT⁶ hence prayed for it to be declared unconstitutional hence null and void, however the high court saw the petition with no merit hence the appeal to the Court of appeal. And it was therein held that:- Our young democracy not only functions but also grows, and the will and dominant aspirations of the people prevail. Restrictions on fundamental rights must be strictly construed and denied. Another thing was a declaration that section 111(2) of the Elections (Amendment) Act⁷ as unconstitutional as it denies the right to justice and democracy by demanding Tsh 5 million for filling a petition in the court of law against the election results hence null and void as per article 64(5) of the CURT.⁸

Going precisely to elections in Tanzania, the union elections are supervised by the National Electoral Commission (NEC) which is a constitutional body as per Article 74 of the CURT⁹ whilst those of Zanzibar are supervised by the Zanzibar Electoral Commission (ZEC) a constitutional body too by virtue of Article 119 of CRGZ¹⁰.

1.2 Background

The United Republic of Tanzania is a state found in the Eastern part of Africa. As the name suggests it is a union of two countries which are Tanganyika (currently Tanzania-mainland) and Zanzibar. Tanzania mainland attained its independence in 1961 from the British rule and Zanzibar’s revolution was in 1963 which marked the end of British colonial rule therein. The United Republic of Tanzania (URT) was born on 26th April 1964 whereby the two countries united to create a single state and this marked the end of the government of Tanganyika substituted by the Government of the United Republic of Tanzania, but Zanzibar maintained the Revolutionary Government of Zanzibar (RGZ). The URT government operated under monoparty political system from 1965 but was transformed in the early 1990s. The political transformations in Tanzania began in 1991, and in 1992 the system of monoparty ended and was replaced by the system of multipartism hence political democracy was born in the URT. These changes led to the 8th amendment of the CURT,¹¹ by virtue of which NEC was established by Article 74(1) of the same. And the Political Parties Act¹² was enacted in the same year together with the amendment of the Elections Act¹³ (currently the National Elections Act¹⁴ ) which existed even during monoparty system to ensure fair and equal opportunity to the party’s members in election. (CCM) then got rivals in the political arena to take control of the entire state. The rivals are to date such as CUF, UNDP, CHADEMA, TLP, NCCR- MAGEUZI and many others making the total of 23 political parties.¹⁵ The controversies in the elections results began here after.

Election management in Tanzania has evolved through three (3) phases since independence. The foremost phase was where the election administrative machinery as it existed from independence to 1990 where it was under chairmanship on the Speaker on the National Assembly, and was constituted of not less than three and no more than five (3-5) members.¹⁶

The second phase was that of 1990 where the commission was handled to the chairmanship of the Justice of appeal (Hon. Lammeck Mfalila). This change was accommodated by the 6th amendment of the CURT¹⁷ together with the Election Amendment Act¹⁸ where inter alia the commission’s constitution increased to seven (7) members appointed by the president and was vested with powers to entertain election complaints.¹⁹

The third phase was adoption of multiparty democracy whereby an independent body had to be established to serve the purpose of executing multiparty democracy elections processes. Then NEC was established by virtue of Article 74(1) of the CURT,²⁰ its administrative personnel were since then appointed by the president as the provision provided and still provides that:-

There shall be an Electoral Commission of the United Republic which shall consist of the following members to be appointed by the President.

The appointees are to hold the office for five (5) years renewable period as provided under Article 74(4)(a) of the CURT.²¹

Throughout all the multiparty elections in the URT, be it the Mainland or Zanzibar, have witnessed a series of events which appear to be the aftermath of each electoral process. These events appear in a serial order from the first multiparty general election to date.

The first multiparty election in 1995, the general elections were the first multi-party elections ever held in the URT since the union in 1964 as empowered by the CURT. They were the foremost elections supervised by the newly president’s appointed electoral commission by virtue of Article 74(1) of the CURT.²² During these elections four political parties had candidates for the presidential elections and thirteen political parties in parliamentary elections.²³ The leading party was announced the victor of the presidential race both in Tanzania-mainland and Zanzibar by NEC and ZEC and for the parliamentary and other posts almost all parties got victory according to the respective territory, but the leading party succeeded the majority seats. However, the opposition was troubled by the results in both parts especially in Zanzibar whereby among of the presidential candidates claimed that the Tanzanian Electoral Commissions especially ZEC are biased acting in favour of the leading party.²⁴ Also the International observers from the United Nations agreed that there was evidence of serious irregularities, but the ZEC refused to hold a re-count.²⁵ Therefore, ZEC consolidated the doubts in the election results to the international level.

The post 1995 elections’ political restlessness in Tanzania precipitated the Chairman of the Common wealth to offer his good office for there to be negotiations between CCM and CUF so as to restore a peaceful Zanzibar. This resulted to adoption of the Agreed Memorandum of 1999 (known as Muafaka I) to provide for reformations necessary to be made in the laws on election for the purpose.²⁶

The 2000 to 2005 multiparty elections were carried out under the previously doubted institution as it was still structured in a similar manner as that of 1995 whose dealings in the general elections by then were complained about. The provisions on the manner of appointing the Electoral Commissioners was subjected to the same laws, Article 74(1) of the CURT (supra) and Article 119 of the CRGZ²⁷ whereby in both the president of the URT and that of the RGZ were vested with the powers to appoint the Commissioners who were to hold office for five renewable years. In both elections the leading party maintained its legacy by being announced the victors of the race, however the credibility of the results was questioned by the opposition parties, they consider NEC and ZEC not to be impartial institutions as intended due to their means of being.²⁸ This made the opposition to claim inter alia not to recognize the announced president by ZEC as the president in Zanzibar.²⁹

The 2010 general elections witnessed the same victors and outcomes as of 1995, 2000 and 2005, but here the situation in Zanzibar turned a bit friendly to the opposition party which attained the closest votes against the victor party.³⁰ In the run up to the elections it had been decided by referendum that the second largest party would also help form the government, and it was this agreement on a Government of National Unity that prompted leading opposition party’s candidate to immediately accept the closest of election defeats.³¹ There was no violation of human rights as witnessed in the preceding elections of 1995, 2000 and 2005 respectively. In addition to that the claims of democracy breaching were not reported in these elections but it was observed that the principles of democracy were adhered to in all stages of the elections.

The latest general elections, this was conducted on 25th October 2015. This phase witnessed the alliance of the strong (3) opposition political parties in Tanzania to be represented by a single presidential candidate was nominated for the general election of the URT but others stood on their own. The electoral process took place by taking into account all the legal requirements of a multiparty democratic election as to be implemented by both NEC and ZEC. Both institutions continuously announced the election results of wards and constituencies after the closing of the polling process. For the presidency position in Zanzibar the leading opposition party pronounced itself the victors for the presidential position on 26/10/2015 contrary to section 42(5)³². However, the election Act of Zanzibar confers the power to announce the election results to ZEC as per section 42(3).³³ The chairman of ZEC later came to announce the annulment of the presidential election exclusively claiming there to have occurred various discrepancies and violations of the Election Act³⁴.³⁵

Thereafter, he declared postponement of the general election to March 2016 as he is empowered with powers to do so as per section 43 of the Election Act.³⁶

This led to rise of various political activists denying the declaration that it was more personal than legal, by claiming that the chairman came to such conclusion without consulting other electoral commissioners hence the declaration was contrary to Article 119(10) of the CRGZ³⁷ which provides for the quorum of ZEC in making decisions to be 6 members whose majority decision shall be of effect rather than the Chairman alone, hence it amounts to usurpation by the Chairman of the powers which by law are vested in the Commission and not himself alone.³⁸ For the URT’s presidency NEC announce the leading party the victors of the race on 28/10/2015.

The March 2016 Zanzibar presidential election witnessed the leading party winning by over 90% of the casted votes,³⁹ but the leading opposition party denied the recognizance of that election and did not want to participate therein, however its candidate appeared on the ballot papers and was voted for.⁴⁰

Therefore, the post elections political atmosphere in Tanzania as evident in each election period since that of 1995 which were the first multiparty democracy general elections in Tanzania since 1965 to the latest 2015 general elections have been questionable in terms of democracy. This is due to the disagreements upon the NEC’s and ZEC’s announced results after the closing down of the polling process by the opposition parties.

1.3 Statement of the problem

The Electoral commissions in Tanzania are questioned of their independence and impartiality as to the manner of their structuring whereby by virtue of the CURT⁴¹ Article 74(1) and Article 119(1)(a) of the CRGZ⁴² the commissioners are appointees of the presidents who are leaders of the state and the political parties they originate. The proviso of article 74(1) of the CURT provides that:-

There shall be an Electoral Commission of the United Republic which shall consist of the members to be appointed by the President.

And Article 119(1)(a) of the CRGZ briefly provides that:-

There shall be a Zanzibar Electoral Commission which shall have a chairman appointed by the President in the manner he deems fit.

Other commissioners are appointed by the same, but in consideration of recommendations as to be provided in respect of paragraphs (b) to (e) of the same.

Therefore, the basis of the matter arising the question on the impartiality and independence of the Electoral Commissions emanate from the legal and institutional framework as NEC and ZEC’s personnel are considered not independent and impartial as they are subjects of the presidents who appoint them hence they are more likely to act in favour of the political party in which the presidents are members. Lack of guarantee of the independence of the electoral commissions.

That being the position in Tanzania, other jurisdictions a good example being Kenya the Electoral commission is composed of personnel who come into being upon being appointed by the president of Kenya and approved by the National Assembly by virtue of Article 250(2) of the Constitution of Kenya.⁴³ The commissioners hold the office for six years and cannot be re-appointed as per Article 250(6)(a) of the same.

Also, in the United States of America the electoral commission’s personnel are appointed by the president, in regard to the advice and consent of the Senate this is by virtue of section 203 of the Help America Vote Act⁴⁴ a principal legislation applied therein.

According to the above jurisdictions’ positions which differ to that of Tanzania whereby the Electoral Commissioners are only appointed by the President and require no further approval as it is not provided for by the laws of the land compare to other jurisdictions, also that the Tanzania Electoral Commissioners can be re- appointed after the expiration of their five years tenure, hence providing a room for manipulation of the Electoral Commissions’ undertakings as to act in favour of the President who appoints and may re-appoint them.

Therefore, up to this juncture democracy in Tanzania elections is doubted by the most election stakeholders in the state as to the impartiality and independence of the electoral institutions (NEC and ZEC) and the efficacy of the laws governing them as to guarantee their independence and precision as to realise democratic elections in the state.

1.4 Hypotheses

The research was carried out on the basis of the following hypothesis:-

i. That the laws on elections are not effective to ensure implementation of democracy in Tanzania.
ii. That the framework of electoral institutions in Tanzania is not structured in a manner to guarantee their independence and impartiality so as to adhere to the elections’ laws.

1.5 Objectives of the study

1.5.1 General objective

Generally, the study examined the efficiency of the legal and institutional frameworks in election in Tanzania. The report was prepared in response to the concerns of the community of the Tanzanians about the problems relating to democracy in their elections and the powers of the law in addressing the problems.

1.5.2 Specific objectives

Specifically, the study made assessment and recommendations on the laws and the involved institutions on the following aspects:

i. The efficacy of election laws in Tanzania.
ii. The position of democracy in Tanzania multiparty elections.
iii. The adherence of NEC and ZEC to the election laws of Tanzania.
iv. Made necessary recommendations as to how violations of democracy in Tanzania elections should be treated by the laws and adopted by the electoral institutions.

1.6 Significance of the study

The purpose of this research is to address the insight of the society regarding democracy in elections in Tanzania. The research generally indicates the provisions of the law on democracy, election disputes that are extra judicial and those which the courts are involved. Also, the findings will help to determine the position of democracy in Tanzania as far as elections and its related matters are concerned.

Specifically, the research is significant as it deals with the following areas:

- It has revealed the power of the laws of Tanzania on democracy matters and shows whether the provisions of the laws suffice.
- It has compared the intention of the laws on democracy in Tanzania with the contemporary practices of the concerned constitutional and statutory institutions.
- It has entailed the demand to adhere to the principles of democracy in Tanzania so as to achieve its social, economic and political ambitions as a developing nation.
- It has suggested the mechanisms for effective execution of democracy in elections in Tanzania by the concerned institutions.
- It contributes to the knowledge to the public on the significance of democracy to individuals and the society at large.

1.7 Literature review

Msekwa, P ⁴⁵ discusses democracy as a product of western civilization and that its foundation lies in the established system of society pluralism, social justice and a strong belief in the rule of law.⁴⁶ He further explains that the society perceive democracy in terms of elections as derived from Abraham Lincoln’s definition of democracy that is “the government of the people by the people and for the people”. And that democracy has three major features including free, fair and competitive elections.⁴⁷ Thus, for a nation to have a democratic government it has to be selected through fair and honest periodic elections, and he sums up the matter by stating that “e lections are the essence of democracy.”⁴⁸ Furthermore, he explains the shortcoming of electoral democracy in Tanzania and most developing nations as that its characteristics do not actually offer the perfect model desired by its stakeholders.⁴⁹ He states that the shortcoming is derived from two major reasons including:-

Lack or ineffectiveness of the rules which restrict the powers of the executive on non-adherence to the rules protecting the individual’s rights of expression, association and political participation; as well as also absence of control which is effective in preventing the people possessing administrative powers from manipulating the electoral process in their own favour.⁵⁰

The second is selection of leaders or groups which have threatened the maintenance of democracy for instance Mr. Savimbi of Angola who is said to be the father of Savimbi theory which states that;

If you go into an election you must win. If you don't win you have been cheated. So, you must refuse to the result of that election, and immediately start fighting against the winning party, through a variety of acts of commission or omission which in turn forces the ruling party to respond by using state power to fight back. ⁵¹

This work although very helpful, the author did not express the basis of his arguments nor did he state how the government leaders manipulate the electoral process.

An article of “Zanzibar democracy on Shaky Foundations ⁵² has view that Zanzibar elections particularly those of 1995 and those of 2000 were not conducted democratically especially in the fairness of the results. It is of a view that the leading party (CCM) influenced ZEC to announce the results in its favour. The article further more addresses that then Political Parties Act⁵³ ought to be either amended or repealed as it had provisions such as inter alia section 18(1), the Minister has the sole power to make regulations under the Act, this gave him or her enormous scope for politically motivated actions designed to weaken opponents of the government hence weakening democracy. The report was summed up by a view that democracy in Zanzibar elections is not adhered due to lack of independence of ZEC and to cure this is by changing the nature of the union of Zanzibar and Tanganyika.⁵⁴

The solution suggested by the article is more destructive rather than constructive;

therefore this study has come out with more constructive recommendations.

TEMCO interim statement ⁵⁵ expressed that it observed the entire elections events ranging from 1995 to 2015 in which democracy was the goal to be achieved in the elections. The commission in its report states that democracy in Tanzania has existed for 23 years⁵⁶, however the pace towards building and consolidating democracy in Zanzibar is relatively slow. The commission expressed to have appreciated the efforts of both NEC and ZEC supervising all pre elections, elections and post- election matters professionally and in accordance to the laws of the land. However, it states to have been shocked by the announcement made by CUF, declaring itself the victor in the race,⁵⁷ but later the ZEC’s boss annulled the presidential results on the grounds of detection of various irregularities to have affected the process and the result thereto.⁵⁸ Furthermore, the commission recommended that Zanzibar election stakeholders should increase confidence in ZEC, that civil education should be promoted in the state, that political parties personnel should respect and control themselves according to the laws of the land and also that they should learn to accept election outcomes.⁵⁹

Kas international reports ⁶⁰ had its primary focus on the 2010 elections. It reported that the elections in Zanzibar by then went peaceful, with no bloodshed, violence or political unrest in the state.⁶¹ This was reported to be a result of the so called “M aridhiano” (reconciliation) between the two rivalry political parties. The report is on the basis of the question that “is it the dawn of a multiparty democratic era?”⁶²

The report finally recommends that the election stakeholders in Zanzibar should keep up the state atmosphere the same as that of 2010 in further and future elections. Therefore, it is revealed that there were efforts made by the Government of Zanzibar to prevent the usual post-election misunderstandings and conflicts. However, the report does not tell if the said “M aridhiano” would be a principle governing for all post 2010 Zanzibar’s elections so as to maintain a peaceful post-election atmosphere therein.

According to Nipashe ⁶³ the election process is very difficult for the opposition to win the race, it states that the executive including the ministers and the president in one way or another tend to give directions to the electoral commissions’ officers in Tanzania hence hindering the democratic election supervision duty of both NEC and ZEC. This was as reported by the newspaper as from the elected opposition Mps from constituencies previously sat by Ministers.

The Tanzania human rights report series ⁶⁴ starting with the 2000 report, the report entails that elections are inter alia the human right matter as it is vital as it allows people in their government.⁶⁵ On the then elections it reports that the opposition was severely subjected to unjust reactions by the coercive forces in Zanzibar leading to injuries and destruction of properties during campaigns and after the polling was done hence violation of human rights.⁶⁶

Following that is the 2006 report,⁶⁷ which portrays that in the 2005 general elections, before and after there were witnessed a series of indiscriminate beatings by the police against opposition parties’ members and their supporters.⁶⁸ The report is of a point of view that the instances violated the human rights and principles of democracy. The report thereafter recommends reconciliation in the Zanzibaris society to eliminate all forms of hate, intolerance and animosity and that everyone should have the feeling of belongingness therein as it the way to promote democracy as far as the report opines.⁶⁹

The 2011 report portrays that the Zanzibar 2010 elections were inter alia guided by the 10th amendment of the RGZC⁷⁰ which provides for the new structure of the government in a way that the president shall be from victor party and that there shall be the first vice president who shall be from the second party in the race and there shall be the second vice president from the victor party.⁷¹ The cabinet also to be formed by not a single party.⁷² This is reported to aim at attaining a political balance as to manifest the existence of democracy in the state. The amendment was a result of the existence of an obvious almost equal influence between the leading and the leading opposition parties. As intended the general election was reported almost smooth compared to the preceding elections the same was expected in the succeeding elections. Therefore the report appreciates the process by insinuating that the then elections were the most democratic election ever held in Zanzibar since the first multiparty election of 1995.

The Report on The United Republic of Tanzania General Elections of 2015 ⁷³ expresses that the 2015 general elections were the most competitive and unique elections in Tanzanian political history as the strongest opposition parties united and formed UKAWA whereby in Zanzibar the UKAWA camp was represented by CUF’s candidate.⁷⁴ The sum of all presidential candidates was 8 for the URT⁷⁵ and 14 in Zanzibar⁷⁶ each from his/her respective political party. It further reports that according to Zanzibar Legal Service Center (ZLSC), more people testified to ZLSC accusing ZEC and local leaders for this conspiracy against opposition parties in Zanzibar.⁷⁷ Furthermore, it reports that Zanzibar elections Director annulled the presidential elections on 28th October 2015 on the grounds inter alia that the CUF’s candidate acted on the contrary to the election laws of Zanzibar and Tanzania at large by declaring himself the victor of the Zanzibar’s presidential post on 26th of the same month which was before ZEC the body empowered to do so announced the same and other collaborative grounds for the cancellation.⁷⁸ However, it is therein expressed that cancellation of the election was political and personal rather than just on the ground that despite the reasons for cancellation the director of elections stated that the cancellation does not affect the URT presidential election results which it states this to be impossible since the election in both mainland Tanzania and the isles was supervised by the same and or related institutions.⁷⁹ Finally, the report comments that the 2015 election was not democratically supervised by ZEC as it might have denied the right of one in favour of the other. Furthermore, that there were witnessed events of human rights violation for instance banning Swahiba FM radio on that it was used by CUF’s candidate to publicise his victory, the ban is said to violate human rights as provided under the RGZC.⁸⁰

[...]

---

¹ Cap 2 of 1977 as amended from time to time

² Cap of 1984 R.E 2010

³ Act of 1985 R.E (2001) - (currently Cap 343 R.E (2010)

⁴ [2004] T.L.R 14

⁵ Loc. Cit fn 3

⁶ Loc. Cit fn 1

⁷ Act of 2001.

⁸ Cap 2 of 1977 as amended from time to time

⁹ Ibid

¹⁰ Cap of (1984) R.E (2010)

¹¹ Cap 2 of 1977 as amended in 1992

¹² Cap of (1992) now R.E (2015)

¹³ Act No. 1 of (1985)

¹⁴ Cap 343 R.E (2010)

¹⁵ LHRC & TACCEO: (2016), Report on the observation of the 2015 general elections in Tanzania; Dar Es Salaam, LHRC pg 37

¹⁶ Mukandala. R & Mushi. S: (1997), multiparty democracy in transition; Dar Es Salaam. TEMCO pg 26

¹⁷ Cap 2 of 1977 as amended in 1990

¹⁸ Act No. 13 of (1990)

¹⁹ Loc. Cit fn 15

²⁰ Cap 2 of 1977 as amended in 1992

²¹ Cap 2 of 1977 as amended from time to time

²² Ibid

²³ TEMCO election observation mission: (2015),TEMCO interim statement on Tanzania 2015 general elections; Dar Es Salaam pg 3

²⁴ Article 19:(2000),Zanzibar: Democracy on Shaky Foundations; London pg 9

²⁵ Legal and human rights centre (LHRC): (2001), Tanzania Human right report; Dar Es Salaam, LHRC pg 10

²⁶ The Commonwealth: (2015),Report of the Commonwealth Observer Group Tanzania General Election; Dar Es Salaam pg 4

²⁷ Cap of (1984) R.E (1992)

²⁸ www.nytimes.com/2005/world/africa/tanzania-election-results

²⁹ The Commonwealth: (2015),Report of the Commonwealth Observer Group Tanzania General Election; Dar Es Salaam pg 5

³⁰ Reith. S: (2011),Kas international reports, Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung; Dar Es Salaam pg 105

³¹ Ibid

³² Zanzibar election Act No 11 R.E (2004)

³³ Ibid

³⁴ Act No 11 R.E (2004)

³⁵ The Commonwealth: (2015),Report of the Commonwealth Observer Group Tanzania General Elections; Dar Es Salaam. pg 5

³⁶ Reith. S: (2011), Kas international reports, Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung; Dar Es Salaam. pg 105

³⁷ Cap of 1984 RE 2010

³⁸ Rwechungura. C: (2015),Statement on the election process statement; Dar Es Salaam.TLS

³⁹ www.bbc.com/swahili/habari/2016/03/160321_zanzibar_results_live

⁴⁰ Ibid

⁴¹ Cap 2 of 1977 as amended from time to time

⁴² Cap of (1984) R.E (2010)

⁴³ Kenya Constitution R.E 2010

⁴⁴ Act of 2002

⁴⁵ Msekwa. P: (2000) Reflections on Tanzania’s first multi-party parliament: 1995 – 2000; Dar es salaam. Dar es Salaam University Press Ltd.

⁴⁶ Op. cit pg 53

⁴⁷ Ibid

⁴⁸ Op. cit pg 54

⁴⁹ Msekwa. P: (2000) Reflections on Tanzania’s first multi-party parliament: 1995 – 2000 ; Dar es salaam. Dar es Salaam University Press Ltd pg 54

⁵⁰ Ibid

⁵¹ Op. Cit pg 55

⁵² Article 19: (2000),Zanzibar: Democracy on Shaky Foundations; London

⁵³ Act of 1992. R.E( 2015)

⁵⁴ Article 19: (2000),Zanzibar: Democracy on Shaky Foundations; London pg 5 - 6

⁵⁵ TEMCO election observation mission: (2015).TEMCO Interim Statement on Tanzania 2015 General elections; Dar Es Salaam. TEMCO

⁵⁶ Op. cit Pg 9

⁵⁷ Op. Cit pg 17

⁵⁸ Ibid

⁵⁹ Op. cit pg 19

⁶⁰ Reith. S: (2011) Kas international reports; Dar Es Salaam, Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung

⁶¹ Op. cit pg 105

⁶² Op. cit pg 104

⁶³ Kuhenga. K: Tume za uchaguzi na mchakato wa demokrasia ya vyama vingi Tanzania; Nipashe, No 116018, Nov. 1st 2015

⁶⁴ LHRC: (2000-2015) Tanzania human rights report; Dar Es Salaam

⁶⁵ LHRC: (2000) Tanzania human rights report series; Dar Es Salaam pg 35

⁶⁶ Loc. Cit

⁶⁷ LHRC: (2006) Tanzania human rights report series; Dar Es Salaam

⁶⁸ Op. Cit pg 172

⁶⁹ Ibid

⁷⁰ RGZC of 1984 as amended in 2010

⁷¹ Ibid. Chapter Iv Part II

⁷² LHRC: (2000) Tanzania human rights report series; Dar Es Salaam pg 260

⁷³ LHRC & TACCEO: (2016), The report on the united republic of Tanzania general elections of 2015; Dar Es Salaam, LHRC

⁷⁴ Op. Cit pg 234

⁷⁵ Op. Cit pg 61 - 81

⁷⁶ Op. Cit pg 262

⁷⁷ Op. Cit pg 232

⁷⁸ Op. cit pg 253

⁷⁹ Op. cit pg 256

⁸⁰ Article 18 of the RGZC of 1984 as amended in 2010

• College: Mzumbe University (MZUMBE UNIVERSITY MAIN CAMPUS)
• Course: LL.B
• Author: Muganyizi Shubi (Author)
• Publication Year: 2017
• Pages: 62
• Catalog Number: V491860
• ISBN (eBook): 9783668982789
• ISBN (Book): 9783668982796
• Language: English
• Tags: NEC, ZEC, TANZANIA