ISSA G. SHIVJI, The Rules of Law and Ujamaa in the Ideological Formation of Tanzania
| Published date | 01 June 1995 |
| Date | 01 June 1995 |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1177/096466399500400206 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
ABSTRACTS
ISSA
G.
SHIVJI,
The
Rules
of
Law
and
Ujamaa
in
the
Ideological
Formation
of Tanzania
The
article
investigates
the extent
to
which
the
ideology
of
rule
of
law
serves
to
mobilize
consent
in
the
Tanzanian
formation.
It
reviews
the
position
in
the
extant
literature
which
argues
that
the
failure
of
the
rule
of
law
as a
legitimizing
ideology
in
African
political
formations
is
largely
because
of
the
incapacity
of
the
African
ruling
classes
to
sustain
such
a
project
given
the
dependent
or
neo-colonial
economic
conditions of
their
societies.
The
article
questions
whether
this
is
the
sole
explanation
and
puts
forward
the
position
that
the
rule
of
law
ideology
is
not
necessarily
resonant
with
the
world
view
of
popular
classes
in
Tanzania.
In
this
regard,
it
is
argued
that
the
Western
debate
on
the
rule
of
law
as
an
’unqualified
good’
and
the
focus
on
rights
struggle
are
not
uncritically
transferable
to
an
African
situation.
It
calls
for
an
intellectual
break
from
the
current
celebration
of
liberalism,
constitutionalism
and
human
rights
as
the
only,
or
even
the
principal,
alternative
ideologies
for
a
popular
project
of
social
emancipation
and
national
liberation.
ROGER
WELCH, Judges
and
the
Law
in
British
Industrial Relations:
Towards
a
European
Right
to
Strike
This
article
offers
a
critique
from
a
legal/historical
perspective
of
analyses
which
characterize
the
British
system
of
industrial
relations
as
being
based
on
a
tradition
of
voluntarism.
The
article
argues
that
legal
abstentionism
in
the
context
of
industrial
conflict
was
an
integral
part
of
a
corporatist
strategy
to
secure
the
cooperation
of
the
trade
unions
in
the
efficient
functioning
of
the
economic
system.
The
article
analyses
judicial
attitudes
to
trade
unionism
and
industrial
action
which
have
remained
relatively
consistent
from
the
Combination
Acts
of
1824
and
1825
until
the
present
day.
Essentially
judges
perceive
the
organization
of
industrial
action
as
law-breaking
and
the
system
of
immunities
as
providing
privileges
to
trade
unions
which
put
them
above
the
law.
This
system
of
immunities -
the
mainspring
of
legal
abstentionism -
has
facilitated
a
process
of
legal
mystification
through
which
judges
have
used
the
principles
and
language
of
the
common
law
to
circumvent
the
immunities
and
to
distort
the
nature
and
purposes
of
industrial
action.
The
article
identifies
legal
mystification
as
having
important
consequences
in
the
last
century,
during
the
General
Strike
of
1926,
and
since
the
decision
of
the
House
of
Lords
in
Rookes
v.
Barnard
in
1964.
It
is
contended
that
emphasis
on
the
voluntarist
nature
of
British
industrial
relations
fails
to
give
proper
recognition
and
weight
to
the
role
that
the
judiciary
has
played
in
providing
a
flexible
system
of
state
intervention.
The
final
part
of
the
article
compares
the
British
system
with
other
systems
of
industrial
relations
in
Western
Europe.
It
concludes
that
pro-union
reform
in
Britain
should,
in
line
with
general
European
practice,
be
based
on
the
provision
of
rights
rather
than
the
restoration
of
the
immunities.
Moreover,
there
should
be
a
campaign
by
trade
unionists
throughout
To continue reading
Request your trial