From left to right: President Jakaya Kikwete, PCCBs boss Edward Hosea and ex-President Benjamin William Mkapa_____________________________________________
Dar es Salaam
THE Prevention and Combating of Corruption Bureau (PCCB) has no legal powers to investigate allegations of corruption brought against the country’s former presidents because of constitutional restrictions, PCCB director Edward Hosea asserted yesterday.
Speaking at a special discussion forum on the new anti-graft legislation for editors and senior journalists from various media houses in the country, Hosea said the national constitution contains various clauses and provisions that make it difficult for the anti-corruption watchdog to investigate ex-heads of state.
’’For instance, Article 46 of the constitution prohibits anybody from raising a criminal and related case, including corruption, against the president in power. Other constitutional provisions protect these leaders against corruption charges even after their tenure of office expires,’’ stated Hosea in response to a question from one of the forum participants.
The question was raised in the wake of serious allegations of abuse of power brought against former president Benjamin Mkapa and first lady Anna Mkapa, who are alleged to have registered their own private entrepreneurship company, ANBEM Limited, and subsequently engaged themselves in private business dealings while still at State House.
According to Hosea, a person wishing to charge or sue a former president would have to abide by protracted legal procedures in order to do so. ’’Such a person will have to forward the matter to parliament for debate and approval. And such a motion would have to be endorsed by a certain percentage of MPs,’’ he said.
He continued: ’’The ex-president himself would need to be notified prior to the corruption charges being brought against him. In fact, there are quite a number of complex and complicated constitutional procedures that protect former presidents from such corruption charges.’’
The PCCB boss said a constitutional amendment was the only way to scrap the restrictive clauses and provisions and ease the procedures for prosecuting top state leaders implicated in corruption during and after their tenure in office.
’’However, constitutional amendments have negative implications. This (the constitution) is a sensitive document, which cannot be amended lightly. That alone will require its own procedures, and at the end of the day, you will find yourself going back to the same story of prolonged procedures. It´s not easy,’’ he told the avidly-listening forum participants.
No comments:
Post a Comment