INTEGRITY SHOULD BE A QUALIFICATION FOR ALL PUBLIC SERVANTS AND BEYOND !!!
Chief Justice Mohamed Chande Othman . PHOTO | FILE
By Mwassa Jingi
Posted Sunday, April 12 2015 at 10:56
Posted Sunday, April 12 2015 at 10:56
IN SUMMARY
· Integrity is a requisite attribute in the Judiciary for without it justice will not be seen to be done.
· Fair administration of justice requires the Judiciary to be above suspicion in dispensing its duties.
Dar es Salaam.
The Judiciary is one of the three main pillars of state, which is
constitutionally established under Article 107A of the Constitution of the United Republic of Tanzania,
1977. In the proposed Constitution, the Judiciary is established under
Chapter 12 in Article 167. If the proposed Constitution is endorsed
through the referendum, which is still undated, will for the first time
in the history of this country establish in the Judiciary the Supreme
Court (Article 171 of the proposed Constitution).
Last
week, I showed how the members of Constituent Assembly tampered with
the Draft Constitution by omitting integrity as one of the
qualifications for both presidential and Member of Parliament
candidates, but leaving the same intact on other departments of the
public service, including the Judiciary. The new law on the Judiciary,
entitled “The Judiciary Administration Act, 2011” has highly pegged
integrity as a necessary legal requirement for senior officials of the
Judiciary after Judges of all levels, who their qualifications,
including integrity, is enshrined in the proposed Constitution. Today’s
article reflects on that law, which highlights integrity as a requisite
attribute for the judicial personnel as dispensers of justice in the
country.
Following
the Presidential Commission of Inquiry Report on Corruption in 1996,
the government embarked on reforming the public service in various
sectors as a way of fighting against corruption and building good
governance as a way of implementing the recommendations put forward by
the Warioba Commission. One of the public institutions, which Warioba
Commission found was highly affected by corruption was the Judiciary.
For
instance, the Commission’s report pointed out that clerks of the court
were demanding bribes in order to open files, expediting their delivery
and hiding those of the accused persons. Personal Sectaries and typists
were accepting bribes in order to produce copies of judgments for
various crimes. Magistrates were accepting offers to issue soft
sentences, to reduce penalties, to withdraw charges, to give bails and
order court injunctions.
State
attorneys and advocates, who work closes with the Judiciary as officers
of the court, on the other hand, were also implicated in the
Commission’s report. For example, the Commission’s report revealed that
state attorneys were accepting bribes when prosecuting cases,
authorising the signing of contracts, which were against national
interests. The report maintained that even independent advocates were
giving bribes to magistrates and judges in order to obtain favourable
judgements for their clients. That was the qualitative status of our
Judiciary in 1996, according the Commission Report on the state of
corruption in the country. However, with the reforms that the Judiciary
and government have been doing, we hope the rate of corruption in the
Judiciary has substantially gone down. No justice can be done and seen
done without having a fair Judiciary. For corruption to persistently
exist in the Judiciary for many years, that means, the rights of many
poor citizens has been continuously denied. Members of the Judiciary
should feel guilty and ashamed of corruption.
The
Warioba Commission found out that corruption was widespread in the
Judiciary and hence recommended numerous measures to be taken to stamp
out corruption in the Judiciary. One of the steps to be implemented by
the Judiciary was to review the Judiciary structure. Many reforms were
implemented since 1996. Under the Legal Reform Sector
(LRS), including establishment of new legal institutions like Lushoto
Institute Judicial Administration [IJA] and the Law School of Tanzania, to
mention just a few. These institutions can only impart knowledge and
skills to the Judiciary, but not integrity. Let’s inculcate integrity in
children and the youth alongside professionalism and experience.
New
statutes enacted by Parliament since then for improving the performance
of the judicial service are many, but the recently enacted, The
Judiciary Administration Act, 2011, is the one I am interested in this
article because it includes integrity as a necessary qualification for
senior officials appointed under this law. The law has for the first
time in the life of the Judiciary established a new line of
administration within the Judiciary, which will be headed by the Chief
Court Administrator, who is responsible for general administration of
the Judiciary.
Before
the enactment of this law, the Registrar was also an administrator of
Judiciary without even having administrative skills. Apart from the law
establishing a new line of administration, it has also enshrined
integrity as a mandatory qualification after professionalism and
experience. For instance, Chief Court Administrator, Chief Registrar and
all registrars of all court levels are required by law to be persons of
high integrity and good character. If the appointing authorities will
do their work properly by engaging people of high integrity as the law
requires, no doubt this will in a short-term change the quality of our
Judiciary and a longstanding story of corruption in the Judiciary will
be history.
The
Judiciary, being the dispenser of justice, is a response to perform its
functions with high integrity. Fortunately enough, the importance and
necessity of integrity in our society is now a catchword of
institutions, which are responsible for drafting of Bills, which later
become statutes after being enacted by the National Assembly and then
assented by President. Integrity, being the opposite of corruption,
should not be a necessary qualification for the judicial personnel only.
It must be a minimum qualification for persons recruited to serve in
the public service of whatever nature. Though the proposed Constitution
has exempted politicians from the requirement of integrity as one of the
qualifications, something, which I think was an intended omission,
political leaders must be bound with the requirement of integrity just
like Judges and other officials in the Judiciary.
If
we ignore integrity in our public service that means implicitly we open
the door for all kinds of corruption to get in as is the case now.
What does corruption mean in modern language? According to the World
Bank, corruption can generally be defined as the abuse of public power
for private benefits. But one common and impacting phrase on corruption
and integrity states that: “Corruption leads to shame and disgrace, but
integrity unites people”. Do we want Tanzania to remain a united
nation? Let‘s embrace integrity and not corruption.
The author is a lawyer/journalist. He can be reached at
No comments:
Post a Comment