Opinion

Analysis


Opinion polls without substance?

Every other day there seem to be a new opinion poll published, telling us who we favour to be the next president and MPs in Parliament. Polls are indeed necessary but should not be taken at face value.
Polls do give an indication of what is yet to come. No matter what politicians say in order to devalue the meaning of polls and surveys (that is, if they are behind), the closer the elections, the more accurate the predictions.
Allowing opinion polls is also a means for democracy to take its course. It is a sign of a healthy and lively democracy when people are allowed to air their views without restrictions. Polls encourage people to ponder over the coming elections and can give rise to debates and discussions on a local level as to what direction the country is heading.
All this sounds very good. But, to fulfill the above mentioned, there need to be some criteria in place. When the results of a survey are being published it is important for the public to be informed on how many took part in the survey and how the survey was conducted. More importantly, it is imperative that the questions asked are also mentioned.
The difference between asking 100 people: Would you support CCM in the coming elections? or asking 1,000 people: ‘Who do you think will win the coming presidential election’?, or asking 5,000 people: ‘Who would you vote for in the coming presidential elections?’ is immense.
Words and numbers do matters, and particularly so when put in a question for people to answer objectively.
A healthy democracy moreover, allows for more than one polling institute to survey the public’s views. Different institutes will reach different results and it is important that the public can see that polls are predictions and nothing else.
Over the weekend, a survey conducted by REDET was published, pitting Jakaya Kikwete as the most likely winner of the presidential elections, ahead of Salim Ahmed Salim. It makes for interesting and exciting reading.
Yet, much of the reports in the media lacked the information which are necessary for the polls to make any sense. Either REDET failed to give out all the facts or mistakes which were done by the different media.
For polls to be of any use in the run-up to the election, we need reports that are accurate and which add something to the debate.

back to headline


CUF claims should not be ignored

Last week the National Chairman of CUF, Prof. Ibrahim Lipumba disclosed serious allegations against CCM, saying that CCM is behind a conspiracy that denied over 30,000 CUF members to register in Zanzibar.
This is a very serious and sensitive issue, which needs careful scrutiny by the Zanzibar Electoral Commission (ZEC). The CUF leader could not just complain of unfair practices out of nowhere.
There have been a number of cases where irregular registration practices have been noticed such as the initial refusal by a civic leader to deny CUF Secretary General, Seif Sharif Hamad from registering on grounds that he was not a permanent citizen of Zanzibar.
ZEC’s responsibilities include monitoring matters pertinent to elections and where necessary make adjustments should there be any discrepancies.
In Zanzibar political tension is rising. There is stiff competition among members of political parties. Unlike in Mainland, people in Zanzibar are passionate about politics.
CUF’s allegations are shocking and leave people with many questions unanswered. Why would someone deny people of their constitutional right to register?
Our country adopted a multiparty system in order to expand democracy. Globally the multiparty system is regarded as a more democratic means to let people express their choice.
But the future looks rather gloomy. There were several incidents, which marred the registration exercise in the Isles and that signal a great deal of unrest.

back to headline


Analysis

Hamad’s saga thwarts registration exercise

By Evarist Kagaruki
The good news to come out of Zanzibar last week was that the Secretary General of the main opposition Civic United Front (CUF), Seif Sharrif Hamad, had finally been allowed by the Zanzibar Electoral Commission (ZEC) to enrol himself in the permanent voters’ register. Good news because the consequences of denying Maalim Seif his constitutional right to register as a voter, were too frightening to contemplate.
Every Tanzanian of average intelligence knows that the move, two weeks ago, by a local government leader (“Sheha”) at the Mtoni Kidatu registration centre, in Pemba, was not only wrong, but politically motivated. It was a crooked, frantic way of trying to use every bad trick in the book to stop Hamad from contesting the presidency of Zanzibar.
The Zanzibar electoral law stipulates that candidates to the Presidential, Parliamentary and Zanzibar House of Representatives posts should be registered as voters. And to register as a voter, a person must have lived in a constituency for a period of not less than three years continuously.
It defies commonsense that Hamad, who had registered and voted in Zanzibar (at the same registration centre) in the previous elections of 1995 and 2000 in which he also contested the Isles presidency, would now be declared “ineligible” to vote! No one can believe that this was a matter of “innocent misinterpretation” of the law. And one can not imagine that a “Sheha” would attempt to block the registration of a person like Hamad without instructions from above.
But what intrigues many people are the way of thinking of those who conceived and hatched the whole absurd idea of barring the CUF leader from registering, believing it could work! Because even assuming the ZEC were so biased against CUF (which is what many in the party seem to believe), it does not appeal to commonsense that the Commission would have sanctioned such a preposterous action.
Personally, I believe that ZEC comprises people of high integrity who know what their responsibility entails for the destiny of Zanzibar.
The Commission’s ruling in favour of Hamad’s appeal (which he was forced to make amid all the humiliation by the local leadership), was exactly what many Tanzanians, irrespective of their political affiliations, had expected. Of course why the Commission did not intervene immediately the ambiguity about Maalim Seif’s registration came to their attention, raises many an eyebrow. Many think that such intervention could have neutralised instantly the political tensions (and defused the anger and suspicion among the CUF faithful against the Zanzibar government and ZEC), which arose in the wake of Hamad’s registration controversy.
Besides, the Commission’s quick intervention could have saved the Zanzibar government from the terrible damage that this issue had done on its image internationally. The country’s “aid” donors who might have thought that the peace accord (Muafaka) between the ruling party, CCM and CUF had improved the relations between the two rival parties and brought some serenity on the Isles, must have been greatly disappointed by the Hamad registration episode.
I am referring to the donors because these are the people who had withdrawn all aid to Zanzibar during the political impasse of that engulfed the country after the 1995 controversial elections, only to restore it following the Muafaka. The second reason I am making reference to Zanzibar’s benefactors in connection with this issue is that President Amani Abeid Karume had won their confidence because of his good governance, which he needs to maintain in order to continue receiving more aid.
However, in the face of the Hamad registration controversy, it is hard for the donors and friends of Zanzibar to continue believing that Zanzibaris have learned their lessons from the past and would now be concentrating on the agenda for peaceful, free and fair elections this time round.

back to headline