By JENERALI ULIMWENGU

More by this Author

I heard it on some FM radio station as I drove in my little village, and I did not believe it. Over time I have become so jaded by all the idiocies I hear broadcast by these radio stations that I suspect I have started building a self-defence mechanism to protect me from raving madness.

Only this was true, as I got to confirm the news hardly half an hour later. Yes, a magistrate at a low level of the judiciary had indeed sentenced some poor unfortunate devil to a sentence of seven years in prison and a fine of Tsh15,000,000 (read fifteen million Tanzanian shillings, and divide that by 2,300 to get your measure in the greenback).

My earlier incredulity dispelled, I was now in reflective mode. Just what was happening with our country? Is it really possible, I was debating in my mind, that a court can impose such heavy penalties for the infraction that was being stated?

Unbelievable

The reason given was as simple as it was unbelievable: The young man had been found guilty of “maligning” President Samia Suluhu Hassan,” according to my reading of the Kiswahili translation of the original.

Now, “maligning” the president could be manifested in many unpredictable ways. It could stem from an interpretation of whatever the accused had posted on social media that the official censors did not agree with; it could also have been something said by an opposition party official who is angered by the continued ban on political activities imposed since John Magufuli was president.

Truth be said, the situation has been nudged and made to move forward a little bit by Samia’s overtures toward the opposition chiefs, particularly Freeman Mbowe, who she helped spring from jail where he was beginning to languish as a terrorism suspect not so long ago.

Still, the snail-paced conversations do irritate some young people, and one could have said something unsavoury. But what is the crime?

Lèse-majesté

There is a crime in most jurisdictions ruled over by a monarchy which works to make sure the monarchy is shielded from any and all attacks by those who do not appreciate royal power and are wont to vent their disapproval from time to time.

The rule is called lèse-majesté.

I used to know such a monarchy, that of Thailand, where King Bhumibol Adyuladej was virtually a god against whom no untoward word could be said, on the pain of long periods of imprisonment for the offending party.

Many a drunken Western boy was often caught by this law. Today, even Thailand has shed this godlike image of its king.

So I found myself wondering if we were on our way to creating a deity of our own; whether this kind of sentencing was not a way of creating a personality cult wherein those we place on a pedestal and worship soon become ogres we can neither deal with nor do away with.

I know this is still early days, and within a few days we will know the exact words used by the young man now behind bars, from which we will know the gravity of the offending words.

At the same time, I am sure, the do-gooders who want to help the young man to get out of jail as soon as possible will have done their bit and helped him to launch an appeal.

It is also possible that the news of the incarceration of the lad will have reached the ears of the intended object of the “insult” herself, the president, and upon hearing the news will move to effect a quick pardon, and release.

Trivial matters

Whichever way this plays out, I am worried that we are losing our collective heads over trivial matters. We tend to take matters that are not worth our consideration too seriously, and leave unattended those I think should preoccupy us more intensely.

The president of our country is a politician, and as with all other politicians, she does politics, and in doing politics, there can be nothing to suggest that she is above reproach. Since she does politics, she is fair game for anyone who wants to critique her, even critique her severely.

She only has to bear with it, seeing as this is a job she chose to do, and doing that job imposes some imperatives, one of which is to bare her to the criticisms of her citizens, even if sometimes the criticism do tend to be overboard.

We should never create the crime of lèse-majesté, whose only object can be a monarch.

All our public officials are exonerated from this form of veneration, and when they go astray we have every right to call them to order. If they cannot stand our criticisms, they are free to resign, and no one will hold them down to a job they do not want to do.

Lastly, the members of the judiciary should stop trying to ingratiate themselves to the president in the hope of some personal advancement. They should just perform their work following their conscience.

Or, is that too much to ask?