Court says denying prisoners ABILITY to vote is unlawful? No; RIGHT to vote

First, my apologies for not delivering the column for December 30, 2022 due to circumstances that were beyond me. Let me hasten to wish you, dear reader, a happy and prosperous 2023.

Second, let me say that, in the compassionate spirit of the New Year that’ll be just a week-old tomorrow, I’ll not divulge sources from which I picked up my gems.

I’ve before me a newspaper bearing a December 22 story from Abuja, entitled, ‘Germany returns looted artworks,’’ in which the scribbler, purporting to quote a German minister, writes:

“We are here to right a wrong. Officials from my country once bought the bronzes, knowing that they had been ROBBED and STOLEN. After that, we…”

No; the bronzes were not robbed. It was the Nigerians were ROBBED OF their bronzes.

Note: You don’t rob something; you ROB A PERSON OF something!

However, it’d be correct to say the bronzes were stolen FROM Nigerians by British soldiers, according to the story.

Come December 22, and we had this story, ‘Prisoners have the right to vote, High Court rules’ Therein, the scribbler says in his intro:

“The High Court of Tanzania ruled yesterday that it was unconstitutional to restrict remandees and convicts serving regular criminal terms the ABILITY to vote in elections.”

Casting a vote isn’t about “ability” (uwezo in Kiswahili). It’s about RIGHTS (haki in Kiswahili). So, I aver, our scribbling colleague meant to say:

“…it was unconstitutional to restrict remandees and convicts serving regular criminal terms the RIGHT (not the ability) to vote in elections.”

The scribbler writes in Para 3 in regard to what two complainants told the court: “The duo…brought the lawsuit this year…saying that they were denied the aforementioned PRIVILEGE during the 2020 General Election.”

Privilege? Nope! If you’re entitled to something such as voting in an election, that isn’t a privilege; it’s a RIGHT!

In a December 22 daily, there’s a story whose headline reads: ‘DCEA destroys 2,584 kilos of drugs, two tones of marijuana and 569.25 kilos of heroin and cocaine’.

In Para 2, the scribbler writes: “Speaking to journalists yesterday in Dar es Salaam shortly after the destruction EXERCISE, Veronica Mtikila…said the action was done…Different institutions participated and witnessed the burning EXERCISE…” The word “exercise” in both sentences is redundant—most unnecessary; a waste of newsprint space!

Still on December 22, where we come across a story entitled, ‘D-Day as President Samia Suluhu opens giant power project’.

There’s a case of wastefulness on this headline, where word economy is most crucial. Needless to say, this is a local newspaper in which the word “President” refers to no other person than “Samia Suluhu Hassan.

When the subeditor uses the headline space to utter the title of our national leader, plus two thirds of her full name, the intention, without doubt, is this: to fill the provided template without straining his brain. A mark of intellectual laziness!

On December 31, another newspaper had a Page 2 story entitled, ‘Cashew production up by 14pc’, in which the scribbler writes in Para 1: “The leading regions FOR raw cashew production IN THE COUNTRY…are Mtwara…Lindi…Ruvuma …and Coast…”

Leading regions “for” cashew production? Nope; we say leading regions IN cashew production. And then, if the regions that you’re going to mention are Mtwara, Lindi, Ruvuma and Coast, do you have to tell the reader that these are “in the country”, namely, Tanzania? Beware, dear fellow scribblers: It’s unethical to treat your readers like they were numskulls, for they certainly are not!

On the same page, there’s a story entitled, ‘Arusha RTO warns drunk drivers’. In this one, the scribbler writes:

“ON his part, Mr George Emmanuel, who is a driver, thanked the Police Force…”

Hello, need we repeat it? When you’ve in mind the Kiswahili expression, “kwa upande wake…,” the English way of saying the same is “FOR HIS PART...”

Ah, this treacherous language called English!