The current debate is about whether or not these “Kadhi” courts should be entrenched in the new constitution of Tanzania.

Confrontations rivalry on the mainland (Tanganyika) between the Muslims “minority” who are 35% and the Christians “majority” who are more than 55% have flared up frequently in the past few years. These exasperating tensions are too complex to be labeled as a fundamental antagonism based on religion. Neither Muslims nor Christians (in Tanganyika and Zanzibar) form a homogeneous block.

The endless debate in the "Bunge Maalum", which has focused itself on the (Mahakama ya Kadhi) kadhi’s courts and the constitutional review, has allowed extreme elements from both sides to speak out with great vehemence potency and so increased tensions between the two communities. It has crystallized the perceived hurts and prejudices that have lain under the surface of a thin veneer of mutual tolerance. Aspects of the entire situation must be examined for the influence of political elements who use religion for their own ethnic reasons.

So we stay with the whole phrase – rule of law – with each one appreciating it according to her needs or as the occasion demands.

Can’t Tanzanian Muslims rule themselves by themselves without being in the constitution? What is the big deal, a religious court being entrenched in the constitution that rules over different religions? What is the hidden agenda? I argue Tanzanians to learn from Nigeria, Pakistan and other nations with Kadhis courts and Islamic Sharia "Law"……..understand the meaning of Kafiris as described by Muslims and what sharia law advocates to the same.

Readers should remember that the fellows who are drafting the constitution are purely lawyers by profession, and going by their egos and personality they are fellows who can easily convince and confuse your reasoning without much ado. They can easily prove a day is a night. Entrenching the kadhis court in the constitution is purely improper, unmeritorious, unconstitutional and against human rights.

Therefore the needs of both the Christians, Hindus, Muslims and any other religion was catered for.

There are unforeseen consequences which are not apparent as per now but of which the coe (lawyers) are aware of. Who is a Muslim anyway? Where does she/he live? Whom does she/he live with? How does coexisting with Muslims affect your lifestyle and culture? Will inclusion of kadhi's court in the constitution change all these? The answer is yours.

 

Christians in Tanzania are arguing that including the Kadhi Courts in the constitution is (apart from favoring one religion) setting the stage for the introduction of Sharia law and simultaneously joining Organization of Islamic Conference “OIC”.

 

Do you think Kadhi’s courts should be part of the new Constitution? Shouldn't the constitution protect the interest of the majority as well as minority? By including Kadhis court in our nation constitution, it is a favor to one religion. It would mean that if need be, we could also include, e.g. Artificial contraceptive clause to favor the Catholic Church in the constitution. Otherwise, anything to do with religion and faith must be left to the concerned believers.

 

God Bless Tanzania,