Does National Development Policy Encourage Participatory Communication? The Case of Tanzania
Mongula, Benedict (2008). Does national development policy encourage participatory communication? The case of Tanzania. African Communication Research, 1 (1), 113-136.
Virtually all political leaders in Africa, at the time of independence, announced a policy of encouraging grassroots participation in the national decisions. The Arusha Declaration of Tanzania was one of the clearest and strongest statements guaranteeing popular participation. The present article takes Tanzania as a case study to analyse why, in spite of all the talk of grassroots participation, it is so difficult to promote significant participatory communication in Africa. This article examines the cases of systematic repression by government of movements attempting to institutionalise participation. Also examined is why there are so few serious, long-term and sustained attempts in Tanzania to introduce systems of grassroots, particularly communication.
State-Civil Society Relationship: the Case of the State and HakiElimu in Tanzania
Mongula, Benedict (2008). State-civil society relationship: the case of the state and HakiElimu in Tanzania. Tanzania Journal of Development Studies, 7 (1), 1-15.
In pursuit of Education for All (EFA), the government of Tanzania, in collaboration with donors, embarked on an ambitious Primary Education Development Plan (PEDP) that aimed at amongst others, rapid expansion of school enrolment. This had far ranging implications on the capacity of the education sector, both human and material resources, to cope with the growing numbers. A research by HakiElimu, a renown civil society organization engaged largely with education, exposed fundamental problems in the education sector following the expansion, much to the detest of the government. What followed was a bitter confrontation between the state and HakiElimu. This paper presents the developments of that confrontation, and analyses it with a view as to what happens when a CSO tries to lock horns with the state. The main lesson is that a CSO takes a great risk by trying to criticize the state's efforts, and therefore it needs to re-assure itself of its ability to survive government pressure when it comes.