Embassy of Belgium & Belgian Technical Cooperation (BTC) Opportunity for scholarships for Masters studies in
TANZANIA
Starting in the academic year 2009-2010
User Review
( votes)The Embassy of Belgium in Dar es Salaam and BTC in collaboration with President’s Office, Public Service Management, announce the availability of a limited number of scholarships for Master studies in Tanzania for the new academic year 2009-2010.
Applicants must have the Tanzanian nationality and be no more than 40 years of age on 1st May 2009, have a relevant Bachelor degree.
The requested course must be related to the professional activity of the applicant and he/she must have at least two years of relevant working experience.
The requested course must be in line with the priority sectors (Basic Health Care,Education, HIV/AIDS Care and Prevention, Agriculture and Food Security, Public Administration, Justice, Environment and Water Management) which foster the realisation of the Tanzania Vision and MKUKUTA.
All applicants must be in the possession of an official admission letter prior to submission of the scholarship request.
Both applications are open to people from public and private sector as well as civil society. Female candidates are strongly encouraged to apply. Applicants need to have the written approval of their employer.
Standard application forms can be obtained from the President’s Office, Public Service Management, Division of Human Resource Development PO Box 2483, Dares Salaam, Tel. 2118531-4/2122908, Fax. 2125299 or on www.estabs.go.tz or from the Embassy of Belgium, 5, Ocean Road, Dar Es Salaam (email: [email protected]) or from the BTC office, 1271, Haile Selassie Road, Oysterbay, Dar Es Salaam (email: [email protected]). Completed and signed application forms have to be submitted with certified true copies of all educational certificates.
All applications (Original application file + 1 copy) have to be submitted to the President’s Office, Public Service Management, Division of Human Resource Development P.O. Box 2483, Dar es Salaam. The deadline for submission is 30th May 2009.
It is recommended to send a copy of the application file to the Embassy of Belgium, Ocean Road 5, P.O. Box 9210 Dar es Salaam.
Dear Anna urio,
Thank you for your comment.
All necessary information regarding the scholarships is been given in the Adds published on our site.
HI
AM TANZANIA WOMEN AGED 28 YEARS OLD I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW HOW TO GET APPLCATION FORMS
I am Shaibu uyagilo aged 39 years old, a graduate from sokoine university of agriculture in agricultural education Education &Extension. In the academic year 2009/2010 i got admission in MSC AGRIC.ECONOMICS with admission no. RPGS/A/30 VOL.XX, at the same university, Iam looking a sponsor who can assist me this academic year 2010/2011.
Thanks in advancce.
SHAIBU UYAGILO,
BOX 145,
IRINGA-TANZANIA
Mobile no. +255 784312927 0r +255 758101075
i have applied for scholorship to study at sua in irrigation eng, when and where will i get the results if have been selected
I am Shaibu Uyagilo, a Tanzanian, admitted for MASTERS at Sokoine university of Agriculture in the academic year 2009/2010(Masters in Agricultural Economics for the year 2009/2010) . I need your assistance for me to pursue that masters, otherwise i will postpone till next academic year 2010/2011.
Thanks in Advance.
Hi, Iam a Tanzanian, graduate fro sokoine university of Agriculture,iam seaking for grants to persue masters of science in Agriculture. I have admission already.
i’ve just graduated from the university in Geography and also grduated from abject poverty. i need a sponsorship to go futher in education.sincce i entered university, i’ve been working on part time as a lecturer at a college to help me survive the harshness of orphnhood and poverty.
i’ve a desire to persue masters degree in any environmental studies.
Hello; I am looking for a better apportunity to upgrade my education .I have BED in Chemistry.
Iam a Tanzanian, currently working as Human Resource Officer at College of Business Education( Mwanza Campus). I have been admitted for MBA( Human Resource Management majors) at St. Augustine university of Tanzania for 2009/2010 academic year, I have found it difficult to obtain application form from your website, please let me know if iam elligible for the offered scholarship and possibly if you can send me an application form?
look forward to hear from you
Am shaibu uyagilo aged 39 years old, a graduate from sokoine university of agriculture in agricultural education and extension, iam looking a FREE sponsor so that i can go for masters in the relaeted field ANYWHERE in the world. Thanks in advance. my e-mail is [email protected]
I am Tanzanian Woman, I have an admission For Masters Degree from Dortmund University – Germany for the accademic 2009/2010 which comernce on September,2009 i dont have scholarship, please would you support me on this.
I am Tanzanian man, I have applied for Master Degree Programme for accademic year 2009/2010 at the University of Dodoma – Tanzania, Currently i dont have an admission from the University i expect to have it late June this year, there fore i will not be in a position to meet your dead line which is 30th May,2009, Is there any option to rescue this situation, because i dont want to loose this opportunity.
I am Tanzanian Woman, I have an admission from Dortmund University – Germany for the accademic 2009/2010 which comernce on September,2009 i dont have scholarship, please would you support me on this.
I m a Tanzanian aged 39 and have applied for admission for masters at the university of dodoma where by they ,the university have not started the prosses of selecting those who are eligible to be given admission.Now im worried if ican manage to meet your deadline in applying for sponsorship.
Now iam asking how are you going to help me so that i dont miss this golden opportunity because the university might be ready to give admission by july.PLEASE HELP!!!
I am a tanzanian citizen studying my Executive MBA at ESAMI ARUSHA TANZANIA. I am completing my first year end of this may 2009 and the duration of my course is 2 years, i would like to send my request to you asking some help for a scholarship at least for the second year fees.
Please let me know if i need to fill any forms so that i can do it early.
Thanks
Dear Sir/Madame.
I would like to know if you can support someone who is studying MBA AT ESAMI EVENING CLASSES
Thanks
Iam Mathew E .siloma a maasai boy from Loliondo Arusha ,a graduate at TUMAINI University ,Iringa University College where I pursued Bachelor of cultural Anthropology and Tourism with upper second class.
I wish you will support me to study Msc. in Natural Resources Management offored by Universty of Dodoma. I do not have any financial suport to this programme.
Please I need your HELP.
thanks.
I would like to thanks you for giving us scholarship information.
I’m a graduate with Bsc in Agriculture related field and i’m interested to further my studies by pursuing a masters degree.
I need your help in which country, and which masters program can i pursue in relation to my first degree.
Best regurd
Daniel N from TZ
Why is it always that your deadline for application for sholarship is much earliar that when various local university announces students admitted for various masters program? Is it a kind of trick??
i am hamdani, i live in LOmbok, NTB, INDONESIA, i completed my graduated in institute of educations for teacher training for language and arts, Mataram.
i hope there are any of financial aid program for master of degree, specially in arts educations and multicultural education, in any where of UNIVERSITY IN TANZANIA.
thanks
best regard
hamdani wijaya
INDONESIA
[email protected]
I AM AMARE WONDWOSEN from ethiopia,i am BED IN PHYSICS I need to continue my msc in related courses please help me.
thanks
Tarekegn is know a student of Mekelle university writing his senier thesis on the COMPATIBILITY AND NECESSITY OF DEATH PENALTY WITH HUMAN RIGHT PROVISIONS; with particular reference to Ethiopia. he needs the support of all of you for his success.
CHAPTER ONE
GENERAL IDEA OF PUNISHMENT AND CAPITAL PUNISHMENT
1. Punishment In General
It is impossible to think society without punishment. When there is a crime there is also a punishment. In order to protect the peace and security of the community, every society has its own institution of punishment. Punishment distinguishes criminal law from all other types of law. It is a shield that protects society from the harm within itself.
Punishment is effective in reducing or eliminating undesirable behavior. Punishment is the reaction of society against the person who breaches the social order.1Every right has a limit. The social contract provides individuals with freedom of action with a certain limit. When one act beyond the provided limit, that is prohibited by law and hence made criminal. The possessor of the right should act within a limit of his right. Otherwise when the possessor of the right act beyond the limit set in his favor he begins to threaten others right and that may cause full of chaos.2 In order to guarantee these rules are respected and to keep the security of society the state applies punishment to those persons who transgress the limit and commit criminal acts. Different scholars forwarded different definition punishment for punishment.
H.L.A. Hart (1968) proposed that a punishment must include the following:3
1. It must involve pain or other consequences normally considered unpleasant.
2. It must be for an offense against legal rule.
3. It must be of an actual or supposed offender for his offense
4. Human beings other than the offender must intentionally administer it.
5. It must be imposed and administered by an authority constituted by a legal system against which the offence is committed.
Many definitions of punishment forwarded by different scholars or legal writers center around these characteristics provided above by H.L.A. Hart. Therefore, to attain the status of legal punishment, a penalty must satisfy all these elements cumulatively. If it does not have one of these features, it ceases to be a legal punishment.
Punishment is one species of large family of measures involving intentional deprivations of a persons normally recognized rights by official inistitutions using coercive means if necessary.4Apart from punishment there is also more rudimentary rule regulated practices with in the groups such as family, school, or customary society, which apply sanctions in case of breach of rules. These practices, however, not fulfill the standard of a silent feature of law; legislations, organized sanctions, courts, etc. that H.L.A. Hart proposed as a standardized definition of punishment.
Not long ago, corporal punishment was widely approved. Parents and teachers were told that “to spare the road is to spoil the child”.5 Both educational legal systems depended upon punishment. Punishment now has fallen into some disfavor. For example physical punishment is seldom used in schools, or with family. But those what one approved as punishment may be considered as “a child abuse” or “spouse abuse”.6 The ultimate punishment, capital punishment, is one part of punishment and today it is extremely rare. But due to public attitude towards disfavor regarding some types of potential punishment it is still pervasive in the world today.
Justification of Punishment
Regarding justification of punishment scholars are not of the same opinion. They provide different reasons why we use punishment. There are many possible reasons that might be given to justify or explain why someone ought to be punished. Depending on its cultural, moral, and religious attitudes different societies have different outlook as to why criminals must be punished. Based on these differences, people have different purposes for punishing criminals.
1. Retributive Theory
According to this theory punishment is interested in correcting past wrongs. It looks backward to the crime and ask what justice requires to correct the past wrong.7It looks towards the original offense and seeks to punish the offender proportionately. This theory which, is the most stringent and harsh of all other theories, believes to end the crime itself. This type of justification for punishment is the oldest of others.
The Golden Rule states “Do unto others as you would have others do unto you”. Law enforcement seems to have its own version on the Golden Rule, which translated as “Do unto others as they have not done to you”.8 According to this theory punishment applied simply in proportion to the seriesness of the offense. When a judge sentences for the purposes of retribution, punishment is simply applied in proportion to the seriesness of the offense. The “eye for an eye” system of justice described in the Old Testament is an early form of retribution.9 It maintain that punishment is justified because it gives wrongdoers what they deserve. The suffering of wrongdoer is seen as good in itself, even if it has no other benefit.
According to the retributivist theory, the more series the crime the more series the series the punishment should be. It underlies the idea of vengeance and revenge rather than that of social welfare and security. Therefore, the retributive theory is an objective of sentencing has no effort to change the offender and provide nothing to the society except a form of revenge. Since those men have done a wrong they must suffer for it. The proponents of this theory say that our sense of moral rightness demands punishment.10
A retributive theory basically relies on principle of fairness, justice, and equity and it refrains from being discriminatory or vindictive in its sentencing approach.11 That means generally, although sentences might be severe and more frequent, the retributive theory suggests that they would be fairer and would impose punishment on those who deserve it.
This theory is based on the concept of ‘just deserts’ developed by Andrew Von Hirsch and Richard Singer, which rejects the idea of individualized sentence and adopts the position that sentence should be imposed on the seriesness of the offense.12 This principle imposes a rank order of penalties and punishment would be arranged to their severity correspond with the seriesness of the crime.13This all helps to eliminate the fluctuating patterns of sentencing disparity that exists through out the states or the world.
Emmanuel Kant adopts an equal treatment version of retributivism, arguing that criminals deserve the same punishment as their victims (death for death etc.) 14 According to him punishment should not only equal but also similar to the offense. According to Kant any undeserved evil that you inflict on someone else among the people is one that you do to yourself. If you vilify him you vilify yourself; if you kill him, you kill yourself.15 Only the law of retribution can determine exactly the kind and degree of punishment but it must be well understood that this determination must be made by court of justice not by private judgment.16
Retributive theory implies punishment on offences irrespective of its deterring effect on others. That means punishment should be imposed on the criminals not only to deter others from committing same crime but it should be imposed because the offenders deserve it. However, some argued that this is a “zero sum game” that such acts of streat justice blood revenge are not removed from society, but responsibility for carrying them out is merely transferred to the state.17As I have mentioned retribution provide nothing to the society except a form of revenge. Even though, retribution provide nothing to to the society except a form of revenge, as states have abandoned social reform as a purpose of sentencing in recent years.
CHAPTER ONE
GENERAL IDEA OF PUNISHMENT AND CAPITAL PUNISHMENT
2. Punishment In General
It is impossible to think society without punishment. When there is a crime there is also a punishment. In order to protect the peace and security of the community, every society has its own institution of punishment. Punishment distinguishes criminal law from all other types of law. It is a shield that protects society from the harm within itself.
Punishment is effective in reducing or eliminating undesirable behavior. Punishment is the reaction of society against the person who breaches the social order.1Every right has a limit. The social contract provides individuals with freedom of action with a certain limit. When one act beyond the provided limit, that is prohibited by law and hence made criminal. The possessor of the right should act within a limit of his right. Otherwise when the possessor of the right act beyond the limit set in his favor he begins to threaten others right and that may cause full of chaos.2 In order to guarantee these rules are respected and to keep the security of society the state applies punishment to those persons who transgress the limit and commit criminal acts. Different scholars forwarded different definition punishment for punishment.
H.L.A. Hart (1968) proposed that a punishment must include the following:3
6. It must involve pain or other consequences normally considered unpleasant.
7. It must be for an offense against legal rule.
8. It must be of an actual or supposed offender for his offense
9. Human beings other than the offender must intentionally administer it.
10. It must be imposed and administered by an authority constituted by a legal system against which the offence is committed.
Many definitions of punishment forwarded by different scholars or legal writers center on these characteristics provided above by H.L.A. Hart. Therefore, to attain the status of legal punishment, a penalty must satisfy all these elements cumulatively. If it does not have one of these features, it ceases to be a legal punishment.
Punishment is one species of large family of measures involving intentional deprivations of a persons normally recognized rights by official inistitutions using coercive means if necessary.4Apart from punishment there is also more rudimentary rule regulated practices with in the groups such as family, school, or customary society, which apply sanctions in case of breach of rules. These practices, however, not fulfill the standard of a silent feature of law; legislations, organized sanctions, courts, etc. that H.L.A. Hart proposed as a standardized definition of punishment.
Not long ago, corporal punishment was widely approved. Parents and teachers were told that “to spare the road is to spoil the child”.5 Both educational legal systems depended upon punishment. Punishment now has fallen into some disfavor. For example physical punishment is seldom used in schools, or with family. But those what one approved as punishment may be considered as “a child abuse” or “spouse abuse”.6 The ultimate punishment, capital punishment, is one part of punishment and today it is extremely rare. But due to public attitude towards disfavor regarding some types of potential punishment it is still pervasive in the world today.
Justification of Punishment
Regarding justification of punishment scholars are not of the same opinion. They provide different reasons why we use punishment. There are many possible reasons that might be given to justify or explain why someone ought to be punished. Depending on its cultural, moral, and religious attitudes different societies have different outlook as to why criminals must be punished. Based on these differences, people have different purposes for punishing criminals.
2. Retributive Theory
According to this theory punishment is interested in correcting past wrongs. It looks backward to the crime and ask what justice requires to correct the past wrong.7It looks towards the original offense and seeks to punish the offender proportionately. This theory which, is the most stringent and harsh of all other theories, believes to end the crime itself. This type of justification for punishment is the oldest of others.
The Golden Rule states “Do unto others as you would have others do unto you”. Law enforcement seems to have its own version on the Golden Rule, which translated as “Do unto others as they have not done to you”.8 According to this theory punishment applied simply in proportion to the seriesness of the offense. When a judge sentences for the purposes of retribution, punishment is simply applied in proportion to the seriesness of the offense. The “eye for an eye” system of justice described in the Old Testament is an early form of retribution.9 It maintain that punishment is justified because it gives wrongdoers what they deserve. The suffering of wrongdoer is seen as good in itself, even if it has no other benefit.
According to the retributivist theory, the more series the crime the more series the series the punishment should be. It underlies the idea of vengeance and revenge rather than that of social welfare and security. Therefore, the retributive theory is an objective of sentencing has no effort to change the offender and provide nothing to the society except a form of revenge. Since those men have done a wrong they must suffer for it. The proponents of this theory say that our sense of moral rightness demands punishment.10
A retributive theory basically relies on principle of fairness, justice, and equity and it refrains from being discriminatory or vindictive in its sentencing approach.11 That means generally, although sentences might be severe and more frequent, the retributive theory suggests that they would be fairer and would impose punishment on those who deserve it.
This theory is based on the concept of ‘just deserts’ developed by Andrew Von Hirsch and Richard Singer, which rejects the idea of individualized sentence and adopts the position that sentence should be imposed on the seriesness of the offense.12 This principle imposes a rank order of penalties and punishment would be arranged to their severity correspond with the seriesness of the crime.13This all helps to eliminate the fluctuating patterns of sentencing disparity that exists through out the states or the world.
Emmanuel Kant adopts an equal treatment version of retributivism, arguing that criminals deserve the same punishment as their victims (death for death etc.) 14 According to him punishment should not only equal but also similar to the offense. According to Kant any undeserved evil that you inflict on someone else among the people is one that you do to yourself. If you vilify him you vilify yourself; if you kill him, you kill yourself.15 Only the law of retribution can determine exactly the kind and degree of punishment but it must be well understood that this determination must be made by court of justice not by private judgment.16
Retributive theory implies punishment on offences irrespective of its deterring effect on others. That means punishment should be imposed on the criminals not only to deter others from committing same crime but it should be imposed because the offenders deserve it. However, some argued that this is a “zero sum game” that such acts of streat justice blood revenge are not removed from society, but responsibility for carrying them out is merely transferred to the state.17
As I have mentioned retribution provide nothing to the society except a form of revenge. Even though, retribution provide nothing to the society except a form of revenge, as states have abandoned social reform as a purpose of sentencing in recent years, the use of retribution as a justification for a punishment has become more popular. In the just deserts approach to retribution, using sentencing process as a way to reform an offender is seen as an appropriate, for it moves attention away from culpability for the past crime for which the offender was convicted.18
Generally, retribution sets an important standard of punishment on the offender. The transgressor must get what he deserves, but no more. Therefore, a thief put to death is not retribution, because it is more than the act of the wrongdoer; but a murder to put death is.19 Those all leads us to conclude the principle of “an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth, …a life for a life” has a deterrent effect.
But some criminal justice practitioners criticize the retributive justice model of sentencing from different perceptions. They raise the increment of prison population in the future. Again many believe that concepts of rehabilitation should continue to play a significant role. Again there is an argument that limiting the discretion of prosecutors and judges will tie the hands of administrators who need flexibility in making decisions about individual defendant.20
Deterrence Theory
This theory aims to prevent crime through the example of offenders being punished. That is, it looks forward to the prevention of future crimes. It is to act as a measure of prevention of future crimes. It is to act as a measure of prevention to those who are contemplating criminal activity.21 According to these theories; punishment should not be designed to exact retribution on convicted offenders but to deter the commission of the future offences.
In the ancient history of punishment all things was deterrent, and the chief end of the law of crime was to make the evil-doer example and a warning to all that like minded with him.22 The argument is that persons seeing and knowing that others are punished for committing crimes will be deterred from committing such offences by themselves.
Deterrent theorists distinguish the effect of punishment as a general deterrent and its effect is a special deterrent.23 Punishment acts as a general deterrent insofar as the threat of punishment deters potential offenders in the general community and it acts as a specific deterrent insofar as the infliction of the punishment on convicted defendants leaves them less likely to engage in the crime.24 General deterrence is directed at preventing crime among general population, while special deterrence is aimed at preventing future crimes by particular offender.25 The basic reasoning behind general deterrence is impeccable. One can easily understand that persons are deterred from actions likely to have painful consequences. Generally the basic idea of deterrence is to deter both offenders and others from committing a similar offense.
General Deterrence
Modern classical criminologists argue that an inverse relationship should exist between the crime rate and the certainty, severity, and efficiency of criminal punishment. They believe that if the justice system could be made more effective, those who care little for the rights of others would be deterred by fear of the laws sanctioning power.26 according to this principle what the laws prohibit because it is disadvantageous to the society can be advantageous to some individuals’ or they may think it is. Society must try to make prohibited acts clearly disadvantageous to all if its laws are to be heeded.27
In some cases the deterrent power of laws can be focused on total elimination of an act. For example, narcotic control laws are designed to eliminate illegal sale and use of drugs such as heroin, and cocaine; this is known as absolute deterrence. But in contrast, the legislators simply wish to control or limit a behavior, like laws restricting alcohol use. These are known as partial deterrence.29 One reason that makes deterrence ineffective is that it relies on certainity and sopeed of punishment. If penalties are high but the chanses of being caught are low, it is doubtful that the potential offenders will be deterred. The very low clearance rates of series crimes illustrate the low probability that offenders will be cought.30
Incapacitation and Special Deterrence
Incapacitation refers to the believe that dangerous criminal offenders should be locked away for a long period of time but special deterrence refers to the concept that the pains of their imprisonment should be so severe that on release convicted offenders will not dare to repeat their criminal act.31 This theory believes on the absence of dangerous peoples to minimize or totally void crime. At the heart of both incapacitation and the special deterrent concept is the believe that a small number of people commit a great number of criminal offenses and that if they put out of circulation, their absence will have a significant role on the crime rate.32But there are varies researches that invalidate the above logic.
Generally if people who have directly experienced punishment for something they did in the past refrain from future criminal activity because of the fear of being punished again, that is specific deterrence and if people who have not experienced punishment themselves but are deterred from crime by the fear that they might get the same punishment experienced by others it is known as general deterrence. When the judge hands down a sentence and tells the offender, “this ought to make you think twice next time,” the judge is thinking of a penalty as a specific deterrent; and if the judge says, “I intend to make an example of you,” the penalty’s general deterrent value is being emphasized.33
Rehabilitation and Reformation Theory
Traditionally rehabilitation and reformation were used interchangeably to express the same thing but it is not correct. Reform is direct consequence of punishment, whereas rehabilitation is an alteration of an offender’s behavior by non-punitive means so that he/she no longer violates laws.34 It is generally expected that the criminal justice process will somehow reform or rehabilitate those caught up in it, or at least will not make them worse. It is recognized that virtually all persons who are processed, even those convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment, will eventually return to the community.35
This theory is leading and dominant feature in the most modern legal punishment. The theory rests upon the believe that human behavior is the product of antecedent causes, that these causes can be identified and that on the basis of therapeutic measures can be employed to effect changes in the behavior of persons treated.36
This approach sees criminal behavior as a consequence of social order or psychological shortcomings. The purpose of sentence, then, is to correct or threat these shortcomings in order to prevent future crimes.36 It is impossible to divorce individual from the community. Because individual is also one part of the community. This theory is the most recent and most human theory, of all theories raised above. It is based its foundation on the principle of reforming legal offenders through individual treatment. This theory presumes that it is proper to sentence an offender based on the likelihood of reform in the future rather than in the criminal conduct already committed.37 it held to make the offender good to rehabilitate or to change the mind of the offender through counseling, education and training.
The rehabilitation philosophy holds that people are at the mercy of social, economic, and interpersonal conditions and interactions. Criminals themselves are the victim of racism, poverty, family disorganization, and other social problems. Therefore, it is the societies duty to help them compensate for their societal produced personal problems.38 There is a view, hold most prominently, but by no means exclusively by persons in psychiatry, that we ought never punish persons who break the law and that we ought instead to do something much more like what we do when we treat someone who has a disease. According to this view, what we ought to do to all such persons is to do our best to bring it about that they can and will function in a satisfactory way with in society.39 The society has an obligation to show the criminal that he/she is not rejected or detested by the community, that he/she is not considered as the enemy of the community and the community understands his misfortune that derives him to this evil. The functional equivalent to the treatment of a disease is the rehabilitation of an offender, and it is rehabilitative system, not punishment system.40
Rehabilitation theory is the philosophy that society is best served when wrongdoers are not simply punished, but provided the resources needed to eliminate (avoid) criminality from their behavioral patterns.41 It suggests that criminals can be treated and possibly even cured of their proclivities or tendency toward a crime.
Since the root of a crime is embedded in a complex array of phenomena, economic, social, and cultural in nature the concern should be in identifying the problem and afford the appropriate treatment. A man may be restrained from particular act of crime on a particular occasion but the criminal nature in him is not touched, the criminal instincts are extirpated and they will bloom again in some other deed of crime. Truly, unless the punishment has the effect on character, unless education is regarded as an essential concomitant of punishment, the can be no hope of making punishment useful. We must realize that it is the criminality of human being not the humanity that must be uprooted.
It is far cheaper and more efficient and humane to help young offenders become established in the community than to punish them with a prison sentence and lock them in to a life of crime.42 Rehabilitation theory emphasized on the criminal offender and focused on correcting them.
These mentioned above are only few among strongest justifications of punishment. There also other justifications like education and incapacitation. But it is worth considering here that none of them exclude the others completely, rather they interrelated to each other. And the most effective punishment is the one that holds most of these justifications harmoniously.
Theory of punishment
The term punishment connotes a moral dimension of responsibility and blame. It is not like responding to one force of nature by creating a counter-force.43 Such a simple mechanistic will not do. It needs beyond such mechanism. Punishing a person is not like a disciplining dog for tailing to heel-rather, punishment sends two important messages: that the society holds the actor responsible and blame worthy for her conduct, and that moral condemnation by the community, with whatever stigma is attached, is appropriate.44
Punishment and offences share some common denominator in that both involve the infliction of pain or suffering to the victim. However there is a big difference between the two. Jeremy Bentham describes these dissimilarities as follows.45
The catalog of punishment is the same with that of offences. The same evil done by the authority of law, will constitute a punishment or an offense. These offense is the enemy of all and punishment is the common protector. Offense for the individual of a single person produces a universal evil, punishment by suffering of individual produces a general good….
Having this nature, in order to achieve its pursuit, punishment should be effective. An effective punishment is guaranteed when the punishment is the punishment is just and equitable. Therefore, punishment, as much as possible seeks to bring the complete public protection at the same time avoiding the infliction of needless suffering on the offender. When I say just and equitable punishment, I want to say attention should be paid not only to the interest and need of the collectivity but also the offender and the victim as well.
CAPITAL PUNISHMENT
“The death penalty is our harshest punishment. It is irrevocable; it ends the existence of those punished, instead of temporarily imprisoning them. Further, although not intended to cause physical pain, execution is the only corporal punishment still applied to adults. These singular characteristics contribute to the perennial, impassioned controversy about punishment.”45
Definition of Capital Punishment
It has been a tradition for a lawyer to start dealing with a subject after the scope their subjects in order to avoid various interpretations of the subject itself. As the saying goes “a well started problem is a half solved problem” I am going to use capital punishment as a meaning “killing of a person by a judicial process for the purpose retribution and incapacitation.” It is the use of death penalty to punish wrongdoers for certain crimes.
History of Capital punishment
The exact date of origin of capital punishment is not known. But there is a view that the authorized taking of human life must be as old as mankind. In the form of human sacrifice, this taking reflects a believe in the sanction of life; in the form of punishment, it forces us to confront our baser selves.46
It has been found very difficult, or more accurately impossible for scholars and students of law interested in the history of capital punishment as to how, when, where, upon whom and by whom it exactly inflicted at first. There is no clear evidence as to the first use of capital punishment. As to Holy Bible, as it is clearly expressed in Genesis Art.4, the first murderer ‘Cain’ was not sentenced to death. From the close reading of the verse of this Bible, Abel’s death at the hands of his brother Cain, didn’t give raise to capital punishment. This is because Cain’s punishment was banishment instead of death. But although Cain was not sentenced to death for murder, the Old Testament makes reference stating that “whosoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed.”47 But one thing is true that the Old Testament was ineffective when Cain committed a murder. The Law of Moses comes be effective later.
The first recognized death penalty laws date back to the eighteenth century B.C. and can be found in the code of king Hammurabi of Babylon in which death penalty was prescribed for over twenty different offenses.48 This is very similar with the ordinance of Bible mentioned above, in which both demands “an eye-for-eye” punishment.
Death penalty is also part of Hittite code in the fourteenth century B.C. The Draconian code of Athens, in the seventeenth century BC, made death the lone punishment for all crimes.49 In the fifteenth century BC, the Roman law of Twelve Tables also contained the death penalty. Generally the ancient civilization and Middle East had the death penalty in their codes. Historically many different crimes were deemed to be capital offences by civil and religious authorities of the day. Offences like murder, treason, arson and rape were widely employed in ancient Greece by the death punishment under the laws of Draco (fl.7th century BC) and the Romans used it for a wide range of offenses.50
Capital punishment has been prescribed for many crimes not involving loss of life, including adultery, and blasphemy and the ancient legal principle Lex talionis (talion)- “an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth, a life for a life”, which appeared in the Babylonian code of Hammurabi, was invoked in some societies to ensure that capital punishment was not properly applied.51
Execution of criminals and political opponents has been used by nearly all societies. In most places the practice of capital punishment was reserved for murder, espionage, treason, or as part of military justice. In some countries, sexual crimes, such as rape, adultery, incest and sodomy, carry the death penalty, as do so religious crimes such as apostasy (the formal renunciation of state religion) were inflicted to death.52 In many countries of the world drug trafficking is also capital offense. In countries like China human trafficking and series corruption are capital offences punished by death.
Capital punishment in the ancient times was often avoided by the alternative of banishment and sometimes by payment of compensation. And also, for instance, from the eighth century to the mid-eleventh century in Japan, it was customary for the emperor to commute every death sentence and replaces it with a deportation to a remote area.53 It replaces the capital punishment to other punishment which is less severe or to which is not severe as before.
In the history of capital punishment, until the existence of code of Hammurabi, there was no unified system of justice, which formalized the relation between classes. Code of Hammurabi was the first to set a different punishment and compensation according to different classes/group of victims and perpetrators. The Torah (Jewish law), also known as Pentateuch (the first five book of the Christian old testament), lays down the death penalty for offences like murder, kidnapping, magic, violation of Sabbath, blasphemy, and a wide range of sexual crimes, although evidence suggests that actual executions were rare.54
Capital punishment is condoned or accepted in Islam. In the Medieval Islamic world, there were a handful or small number of Sheikhs, who were opposed to killing as punishment and also in the ‘One thousand and One Night’, which is also known as ‘Arabian Night’, a fictional storyteller Sheherazade is portrayed as being the ‘Voice sanity and Mercy’, generally opposed the death punishment.55
The Qur’an prescribes the death penalty for several hadd (fixed) crimes-including adultery and apostasy of Islam. But murder was not among them. In Islam murder is treated as civil crime and is covered by the law of qisas (retaliation), whereby the relatives of the victim decide whether the
Offender is punished to death by authorities or made to pay diyah (wergild) as compensation.56
Before the development of modern prison systems, in the Medieval and modern Europe, death penalty was used as a generalized form of punishment. For example, in 1700s in Britain there were 222 crimes which punished by death, including simple offences like cutting down of a tree or stealing animal.57 Even though, there was many offences that is punished by capital punishment (death), it was not applied as widely as the law provided. Many capital offenders escaped death, because jurors or courts would not convict them or because they were pardoned, usually on condition that they agreed to banishment; some were sentenced to the lesser punishment of the then American colonies and later to Australia.58
Generally, capital punishment is historically controversial issue both nationally and internationally. It is believed that it exists before societies organized.59
The historical significance of capital punishment is not only related to punishment but also to the social control. Capital punishment by its nature was often administered upon those who identified as members of social problem populations.60 In such cases where it was believed that these populations did not respect the established authority or where it is believed that these populations were viewed as dangerous to the established authority, capital punishment is administered.
Methods and Modes of Executing Capital punishment
Before the age Enlightenment, that is 18th century, in Europe as well as in every corner of the globe, execution of capital punishment was characterized by torture and slow brutality. Executions were carried before an assembly of crowd. One of the most defining characteristics of European Enlightenment was a call for moderation in existing punishments.61 In the history of capital punishment, death penalties carried out by different means like beheading, boiling in oil, burning alive, burning, crucifixion, disembowelment, drawing, flying alive, hanging, impalement, stoning, strangling, being thrown to wild animals, and quartering (being torn apart). 62 Those all were practiced as modes of punishment in the ancient times.
In Britain, hanging became the usual method of execution in the tenth century AD. As many as 72,000 people were executed in the sixteenth century during the reign of Henry VIII by common execution methods including boiling, burning at the stake, hanging, beheading, and drawing and quartering.63
In America, when the young United States adopted the practice of capital punishment from England, it also adopted the methods of the mother country. The methods like drawing and quartering and boiling the convict alive are the methods adopted by the United States from Britain.64 In nineteenth century, the practice of hanging replaced these techniques on the ground that they were too “barbaric”.
In the history of capital punishment America tried (attempted) to make the mode of execution more humane. The 1890s saw the introduction of electrocution as less painful method of execution than hanging. Navada introduced lethal gas as the more humane method of executing capital punishment in 1924, but the “chair” was the primary form of execution until 1980s.65 Different states of United States use different methods of execution of capital punishment. Today the most common method of execution in United States are lethal injection (sixteen states), electrocution (fifteen states), lethal gas (eight states), hanging (four states), and firing squad (two states).66
In United States, of the 143 executions carried out between 1977 and 1991, 54 were by lethal injection, 83 by electrocution, 5 by gas chamber, and 1 by firing squad.67 Among the states of America eight states provide for more than one method of execution and grant the condemned person a choice, usually between lethal injection and other methods.68 Generally lethal injection is considered as more humane than others and it was first used by Texas in 1982 and today this method dominates executions in United States.69 According to its proponents the measure advantage of this method is that its painless.
Arguments on Capital Punishment
As I have mentioned earlier capital punishment has been one of the most controversial aspects of justice system in the world. Different scholars or thinkers have offered various arguments to support and reject of capital punishment.
In the history of capital punishment different law enforcement agencies, criminologists, philosophers, religious figures, and general public have argued about capital punishment from many different perspectives. Still it is subject to controversy that states are not agreed on the necessity of capital punishment. Some believe that capital punishment would deter criminals, while others contend that persons should be punished based on the doctrine of retribution.
A judge’s most awesome sentencing alternative for those convicted of capital crime is the imposition of death sentence. It is the only sentence that once executed it is irreversible and final. It deprives the convicted person of an ultimate appeal.70
As the 18th century saw the coming of new ideas and thoughts the argument that capital punishment must be abolished get the inertia to counter-act the contrary view. Casare Beccaria was an outstanding person to condemn the use of capital punishment on its publication an ‘Crimes and Punishment’.71 This contained a general condemnation of the use of death penalty and its tendency to corrupt people rather than to prevent crime. People in different countries divided between two competing ideas having their own symbolic cause either to abolish or retain capital punishment. The argument of both emanate from different aspects of human knowledge.
The abolitionists are claiming gradual victory from year to year; while the retentionists hold the view that abolitionists didn’t infact secure victory, since the victory abolitionist claim is based on the number of risks.
Advocators of capital punishment believe that those who commit a murder have forfeited their right to life. In addition, they believe that capital punishment is just form of retribution that expresses and re-enforces the moral indignation of law-abiding citizens.72 That means any individual who kills human being must pay for the crime. They believe that capital punishment is morally fitting on the ground that a person who does wrong should suffer in proportion to his wrongdoing. However, the opponents (abolitionists) of capital punishment argue that, by legitimizing the very behavior that the law seeks to express-killing-, capital punishment is counter productive the moral message it conveys. Furthermore, they urge, when death penalty is used for petty offences, it is immoral because it is wholly disproportionate to the harm done.73
Again scholars argue whether or not death penalty is more deterrent. Supporters of capital punishment claim that death penalty is uniquely potent deterrent effect on potentially violent persons for whom the treat of imprisonment is not sufficient restraint.74 According to some thinkers such as Kant, punishment should not only be equal but also be similar to the offence. This is based on the reason that most people will not commit a crime (act of homicide or other crime punishable by death) if they know the consequence of their act, that is, they may be executed as a result. Accordingly, if you steal from him, you steal from yourself; if you kill him, you kill yourself. The point is only law of retribution can determine exactly the kind and degree of punishment but such determination must be made by court of justice not by private individual judgement.75 According to those who favor death penalty, the prospects of capital punishment even perceived from the distance frightens the would be killer and stop s him from committing crime. Because there are peoples who are more deterred by horror of punishment than the punishment itself. They hold the view that the fear of loosing once life will stop people from taking others life.76 That means they abstain from it by regarding it with horror.
Death penalty, even in its common sense, is the most feared punishment than other subsidiary punishments. Due to this reason the advocators of capital punishment say that, it is easier for professional criminals to accept imprisonment whatever the duration may be than being hanged or shooted.77
On the other hand the abolitionist hold the view that not a deterrent to capital offences. They argue that the research generally has demonstrated that, the death penalty is not more effective deterrent than life or long term imprisonment.78 They further believe that such terrible but relatively immediate punishment of execution does not deter criminals, instead the hold a long and painful punishment, that is, long and life imprisonment. This punishment is better depriving once freedom of action and also helps to deter others from such act by taking that example. They rise that in the history, capital punishment was used even for petty crimes and non-deterrence of it. According to their argument, if the capital punishment, in the ancient civilization, did not deter even petty offences like pick pockets or did not keep men from stealing horses or others, how it would keep men from committing murder? 79 They believe that capital punishment cannot deter criminals from committing such act, even there was a case when a man witnessed the execution of death penalty yet commit murder.80 Therefore, the abolitionist hold the view that because of all mentioned above and many other similar facts capital punishment has no deterrent effect. And they offer a substitution of capital punishment, that is life imprisonment.
There is also a dispute whether capital punishment can be administered in a manner consistent with justice. The advocators of capital punishment believe that it is possible to fashion laws and other procedures that ensure that only those who deserve death are executed. In contrast, the opponents of capital punishment maintain that the historical application of capital punishment shows at any attempt to single out certain kinds of crime as deserving of death will inevitably be arbitrary and discriminatory.81 Due to this reason they hold the view that it is impossible to fashion laws that execute only those deserving death. They also propose that, even in a well run of criminal justice system, some peoples will be executed for crimes they did not commit.82 The German refugee scholar and lawyer Max Hirschberg, in his study wrongful convictions, rightly observed, “Innocent men wrongfully convicted are countless”83. Due to all these reasons abolitionists oppose the application of death penalty.
Proponents of capital punishment always argue that, execution serve as a strong deterrent for series crimes and produce the only real assurance that brutal criminals can never jeopardize the society. For these persons putting dangerous persons to death also conforms the desert perspectives requirement that punishment must be in proportion to the seriousness of the crime.84 They believe that most capital offences must be punished by most severe punishment or capital punishment. For the very series crime it is better to use series punishment. For this argument they propose, “before the brutality the death penalty is considered the brutality the offender showed the victim must not be forgotten.”85
However, the abolitionist criticized the death penalty, pointing to its consequences, like its finality, brutality, of the act and mistakenly executing of innocent person.86 Death penalty by its nature has a final consequence. Once one is deadly punished everything become final. He has no any chance to survive again. This makes its brutality higher than other punishments. Again also mistake is unavoidable task in our life. Once we engaged in work there is so many possibilities to commit a mistake or fault. Since mistake can and have been made in its imposition, the innocent have been executed, and of course, that there is no remedy for any such mistake. Due to such reasons abolitionists condemn the applicability of death penalty.
To put all in a nutshell, capital punishment is as controversial as any issue in criminal justice. The proponents of death penalty its use is justified in terms of just-deserts; taking of the life of one who has taken another’s life is the only just retribution. They support their argument by the Biblical prescriptions of the eye-for-eye, …life-for-life.87
Advocators also argue that, death penalty is necessary to deter others from committing murder and other terrible offences and that without it there would be little reasons for criminals to refrain from killing.88 According to those peoples, if the death penalty is not allowed a person who commit certain crimes will leave without loosing nothing.
They also argue that, capital punishment is the only way for assurance of a criminal not to commit a murder or other crimes again. Once a person is deadly executed he/she has no chance to commit another crime. This saves the community from crime. But in case of life imprisonment criminals (prisoners) may commit a crime in a prison or outside the prison. Therefore, they conclude their argument killing criminals is considered as assuring person or community from terrible made by such individuals and it is considered as assuring person or community from terrible made by such individuals and it is considered as the best way to protect the peace and security of the community at large.
The proponents again hold the view that the death penalty is an essential social symbol, expressing the boundary of our cultural standards of decency and humanity. It is better to set outer limits beyond which unnecessary behavior cannot be tolerated. According to those persons, death penalty is clear and firm statement of our outrage at and repulsion for murderers acts.89
The opponents of death penalty highly criticized the necessity of death penalty. They maintain that historical evidence indicates that there is a diminution in capital crimes, even when death penalty was rapidly and publicly used.90 As I have mentioned earlier capital punishment is the oldest method of punishing criminals, but the simple fact is the frequency of application seems to have no relevance to the crime rate. Those groups of people say that if deterrence theory worked, theoretically there should be a decrease in series crime when death penalty is used and increase when it is forbidden.
The opponents also insist that a person sentenced to death suffers more than his victim suffered. This excess suffering is undue according to rule of retaliation (lex talions).91 Of course, one cannot know whether the murderer on death row suffers more than his victim suffered; however, unlike the murderer the victim deserved none of the suffering inflicted.
Becarria argued that, by killing of a murderer, we encourage, endorse, or legitimize unlawful killing.92 According to him the physical similarities of punishment to the crime are irrelevant.
Opponents also maintain that the publicity surrounding an execution may attract unbalanced people to commit capital crimes rather than deter potential murderers, as the seek the attention given to a person being executed and therefore commit crimes in order to be on center stage themselves.93These all are some among many arguments raised by different scholars towards capital punishment favoring and opposing its application.
Religious Views Towards Capital Punishment
Although death has prescribed in many sacred religious documents and historically was practiced widely with the support of religious hierarchies, today there is no agreement among religious fathers, or among denominations or sects with in them, on the morality and necessity of capital punishment. During the last half of twentieth century, increasing number of religious leaders campaigned against the death penalty. For example, Pope John Paul II condemned capital punishment as cruel and unnecessary punishment.94
Bible centered persuasion
The issue of capital punishment is related to morality. Morality is part of societies belief. Societies belief may emanate from their religion, custom, history, and some other factors attached to cultural values.
The retentionist hold the view that the most drastic form of crime, the taking away of human life, must deserve the most drastic form of punishment. The forwarded the Biblical teaching that “He that smith a man, so that he die, shall be surely put to death”.95 They also hold principle of ‘lex talianism’ as propounded clearly by the saying “life to life” is a justification for capital punishment. Let us see the status of capital punishment in different religious.
1.Buddhism
Buddhism is a religion and philosophy founded by Siddhartha Gautama in the North East India, during the period from the late 6th century to the early 4th century BC.96 There is a disagreement among the followers of this religion as to whether or not Buddhism forbids death penalty.
Chapter ten of the Dhammapada states;97
“Every one fears punishment; everyone fears death, just as you do. Therefore, do not kill or cause to kill. Everyone fears punishment; everyone loves life, as you do. Therefore, do not kill or cause to kill.”
The final chapter of the Dhammapada, states, “Him I call Brahmin who has put aside weapon and renounced violence towards all creatures. He neither kills nor helps other to kill.98 These sentences are interpreted by many Buddhists as an injunction against supporting any legal measure which might lead to the capital punishment. However, since interpretation is personal, there is a dispute on this matter.
Historically, most states where the official religion is Buddhism have imposed death penalty for some offences. Again also some has abolished capital punishment. For example, Bhutan has abolished death penalty, but Thailand still retains it, although Buddhism is the official religion of both countries.99 Therefore, I can conclude that in Buddhism it is not clear whether death penalty is allowed or not.
3. Islam
Capital punishment is allowed in Islam. The Qur’an prescribes the death penalty for several offences/crimes including robbery, adultery, and apostasy of Islam.100 Scholars of Islam hold it to be permissible but the victim or the family of the victim has the right to pardon. That means they can determine whether the offender is to be punished by death or not. In Islamic jurisprudence, to forbid what is not forbidden is forbidden. Consequently, it is impossible to make a case for abolition of death penalty.101 For these peoples, abolishing death penalty is considered as violating the rules of Qur’an.
Even though capital punishment is condoned in Islamic law or Shari’a law, there is a great variation with in Islamic nations as to actual capital punishment.
4. Judaism
Judaism is the religion of Jews. The official teaching of Judaism approve the death penalty in principle but the standard of proof required for the application of death penalty is extremely stringent, and in practice, it has been abolished by various Talmudic decisions, making the situation in which death sentence could be passed effectively impossible and hypothetical.102
”It is better and more satisfactory to acquit a thousand guilty person than to put a single innocent one to death”.103 This famous quotation, which every law student and scholars use, is taken from the 12th century legal scholars , Maimonides. This person argued that executing a defendant on anything less than absolute certainty would lead to slippery slope of decreasing burden of proof.104 Generally, in Judaism religion capital punishment exists in principle but the standard of proof required for its execution makes it difficult for its existence and application. It needs absolutely certain standards of proof.
5. Christianity
Christian position on the necessity of capital punishment is not of the same. Although some interpret that Jesus’ teachings condemn the death penalty in Gospel of Luke and Gospel of Matthew regarding turning the other cheek, and John 8:7 of the Bible, others consider Romans13:3-4 to support it.105 There so many branch of Christian religion(denomination) and their position regarding capital punishment varies from one another.
a. Roman catholic church
The Roman Catholic Church traditionally accept capital punishment as per the theology of Thomas Aquinas (who accept the death penalty as necessary deterrent and prevention method, but not as a means of vengeance.106 In the history of Catholic Church, Pope John II, condemned the death penalty and the Catholic Church holds that capital punishment should be avoided unless it is the only way to defend society from the offender in question.107 The catechism of the Catholic Church states:108
Assuming the guilty parties identity and responsibility have been fully determined, the traditional teaching of the church, does not exclude recourse to the death penalty, if this is the only possible way of effectively defending human lives against unjust aggressor. If, however, none lethal means are sufficient to defend and protect people’s safety from aggressor, authority will limit itself to such means, as these are more in keeping with the concrete conditions of common good and are more inconformity to the dignity of human person. Today, in fact, as a consequence of possibilities which the state has for effectively preventing crime, the rendering one who has committed an offense incapable of doing harm-without definitely taking away from him the possibility of redeeming himself-the causes in which the execution of the offender is an absolute necessity are very rare, if not practically non existent.
Generally, in this church, capital punishment is traditionally accepted but scholars of this religion hold the view that if it is possible to deter criminals by means other than capital punishment, it is better to abolish.
b. Eastern Orthodox Church
Eastern Orthodox Church is against the death penalty, believing that killing is wrong in any circumistance.109 This denomination hold the position that killing is immoral and they sited the Christ’s teaching to love their enemies.
c. Protestants
There are so many Protestants and they also take different position regarding capital punishment. Several key leaders early in the protestant reformation, including Martin Luther and John Calvin, followed the traditional reasoning in favor of capital punishment, and the Lutheran Church’s Augsburg Confession explicitly defend it. Some protestant groups have cited Genesis 9:5-6, Romans 13:3-4, and Levictus 20:1-27 as the basis for permitting the capital punishment.110 Those groups base their argument provisions of the Gospel “Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets; I am not come to destroy, but to fulfill” 111people in this category of thought believe that the new testament is not by any means lenient to let the wrong-doer go unpunished. Instead they claim that the church leave the matter of justice to the government in power.
Mennonites Church of the Brethren and friends have opposed the death penalty since their finding, and continue to be strongly opposed to it today.112 These groups, along with other Christians condemned the use of capital punishment, and they cited Christ’s sermon on the mount (Matthew 5:7) and sermon on the plane(Luke 6:17-49).113 In These provisions Christ tells his followers to turn the other cheek and love their enemies. This generally, which these groups believe mandates, nonviolence, including to the death penalty.
Generally, the issue of capital punishment is subject to controversy even among religious followers. The advocator holds the view that one must be punished by the supreme punishment, as he has violated the supreme law, that is, the highest sacredness of life. But the opposers of this view hold Christ’s teaching to his followers to turn the other cheek and love their enemies. Therefore, still capital punishment is subject to argument.
tel: +251913141376
Tarekegn is know a Mekelle university student of Law and he is writing his senier thesie on the NECESSITY AND COMPATIBILITY OF DEATH PENALTY WITH HUMAN RIGHT PROVISIONS; WITH PARTICULR REFERENCE TO ETHIOIA
and he needs the support of all of you.
The following are part of it.
I AM Girma wondie an ethiopia in meteorology Gc student in arba minch university after 100 day i well be graguiet in meteorology pelce give a chance to continue the master program related filed.
We need such type of scholarship open to Ethiopians. Because I am also interested to apply for the Masters programme especially in electrical power engineering.I am electrical-electronics technologistand working as an instructor in a college.Please if you have any scholarship I am looking forward your email.
Thank you for your cooperation in advance
Milkias berhanu
I am Ziada Tajo a Tanzanian holder of Bachelor of Education,Arts and Sciences from SUZA.I am seeking the schola
rship sponser for master program on the field of Artsor other related fields.I am working as Tutorial Assisstant at The State University of Zanzibar. last year I got Admission letter from the University of Dar-es-salaam unfourtunately I didnt go.My ambition to learn more so as to be skillful ,energetic ,knowledgeable
and consultant.
Thanks,I hope my application will be considered
I
Hi,
Greetings from Arusha Tanzania.Real I’m appreciating your information about New Scholarships. I want to know the deadline
of this scholarship from Bergium Embassy in Tanzania.
I got a GPA 3.9 in Bachelor of Education from Mount University,
now I’m looking for masters in the following field:
– education
– public administration
– political science
– human resource
Again I want to know the procedure on how to get application forms from Embassy of Belgium. I’m struggling to get a chance from Mzumbe University or Open University of Tanzania.
Wish you all the best.
I’m Alicko Bernard a Tanzania citizen holder of Bachelor in mechanical engineering from Dar es salaam Institute of Technology , I’m seeking the scholarship sponser via your embasy for master program on the field of industrial Economicsor other related feilds
Im tanzanian lady 28yrs old holding BA sociology lm looking for MA shorlaship for Public Adminstration l will kindly apreciate if l will get the offer as will help me and my country.
I have Bsc in Agronomy, currently working as Agricultural Research Officer II. I am looking for an opportunity to further my education to masters level especially in plant improvement or agricultural economics.
Kindly request for your cooperation.
Thank you for providing this service.
I am a Tanzanian woman, aged 39 years old. I have B.Ed(Science) and M.A (Ed) with GPA of 3.7 and 3.6 respectively, both from University of Dar es Salaam. i am Looking for a sponsorship to persue my Ph D in Management of Education and administration or Human Resource management in Education sector. Please, assist me to get a scholarship and admission on the relevant University. I am ready to study through distance learning programme.
I am looking forward for your positive response.
I am Prosper J Kimaro, an assistant lecturer at Moshi University College of Co-operative and Business Studies in Tanzania. I am a holder of MA in Rural Development and Ba with Education. I am looking forward for the opportunity to pursue a PhD Development Studies in any University in Belgium. My areas of interest is on Marketing of cash crops in changing agricultural policy environment. According to the application for PhD advert I am supposed to have a promoter in Belgium and in Tanzania, for the Tanzanian side , I have some already.My critical question is how can I get a University and a promoter in Belgium while I don’t know any body? please healp me because the deadline for application is 014\2009 and I am so eager to pursue this programme so as to increase my skills and knowledge in order to serve my community and my students better.
Hello!
I’m Erasto Malila, a Tanzanian aged 33 years. I’m journalist by professional who hold a Bachelor of Arts & Social Science in Journalism with Upper Second Class, 3.5 GPA.
Currently, am working as a Communication Specialist at Compassion International Organization, Tanzania office. I’m looking for a free scholarship to further my profession in masters program in the field of Internationa relations, Public relations, or Rural development.
I trust that you will consider my application favourably
With best regards,
Hello!
I’m Erasto Malila, a Tanzanian aged 33 years. I’m journalist by professional who hold a Bachelor of Arts & Social Science in Journalism with Upper S
Currently, am working as a Communication Specialist at Compassion International Organization, Tanzania office. I’m looking for a free scholarship to further my profession in masters program in the field of Internationa relations, Public relations, or Rural development.
I trust that you will consider my application favourably
With best regards,
I am an employee of the Ministry of Energy and Water Development here in Lusaka, Zambia. I have been admitted in to the Master of Environmental and Energy Management offered by the University of Twente in the Netherlands, but the hindrance in pursuing this programme lies in the non availability of a scgholarship as the Netherlands Embassy accredited to Zambia has stated that the programme is not on their priority list. So now I am seeking a scholarship to cover the following costs: Tuition fee Euro 12 500, living expenses in the Netherlands are estimated at Euro 900 per month and additional initial settling allowance of Euro 1 500. The total expenses come to Euro 24800 for one year. The cost of travel I would request with my employer.
I am Azmera Alallo from Ethiopia .
I completed my Bsc. in crop production and protection.
Now I want to join in your university to continue my Msc. program in the related field&also plant breeding.
Thank You
I have two BAs in Biblical Studies and Theology but would like to pursue MA in Rural Development or any social development studies. I wish to have the admission letter to utilize the Joint Japan- Great Britain scholarships. Let me know if I can be admitted.
Thanks. Jemiter
I have a BA degree in English, I have another BA degree in Management, and I have a master’s degree in curriculum, all from Addis Ababa University of Ethiopia. If I get full scholarship I want to study your offer.
Hi dear, I am a degree graduate studhere of mekelle University in Economics Department with CGPA of 3.86, I am looking for master degree in Envirunmental and Natural Resource economics,Devekopment economics, Urban and reginal planning, Industrial economics, Agricultural economics and other related fields,so I kindly request your cooperation in searching me a scholarship appreciating your suport in advance. Here, are more informations in case it is required,
First name; Muuz
Llast name hadush
Birth date; Octover16/10/1984
Bachelor degree ; in economics( department of economics,faculty
of business and economics)
CGPA; 3.86(cummulative grade point average)
Future programes ; 1, Environmental and Natural Resourse
Economics programe
2, Development policy programe
3, Agicultural Economics programe
4, Reginal plannig and policy programe
5, Urban development
6, industrial Economicsor other related feilds
work station; National Regional States of Tigray( capacity
building department) bureau.
position, Trainer in a managment institution
Adress; Mekelle, Tigray, Ethiopia
Fax; 0340407375
Reward; Certificate on my first thesis by Ethiopian Economic
Association for the second best all over universities
Experience; six years as a Research Assistant and translator in
IUC-MU VLIR project b/n MEKELLE UNIVERSITY
(ETHIOPIA) AND KULEVEN UNIVERSITY (BELGIUM)
Attended Institution; mekelle university,
I suggest the age limit to be raised from 40 years to 50 years. Many of the managers of the institutions are energetic and can work beyond the age of 65 years. These are people who currently responsible for large national projects, and their previous education do not pace with new technical development and knowledge. To keep pace with new development and to safeguard their current post, they need to upgrade their education. To help them, give them opportunity to join colleges to upgrade the education . In Africa particularly Tanzania experience is not given priority against academic qualification.
what about the courses on Management and Administration of the Art? in which category does it falls?
I am an Assistant Lecture at the University and I want to Apply for.
or other studies like arts, media and Design.
it seems we have been forgotten
we would like to ask how about no citizen just international students?
hello ?I’m mkunda from Tanzania looking for a free scholarship to further my educatinal at least in master”s level in the field of Rural development
hope you will consider my case favourably
kind regards
I am Alemayehu from ethiopia and I have BSc in computer science and information technology in 2006. But now i want to have my MSc so please if there is any chance inform me!!
We need such type of scholarship open to Ethiopians. Because I am also interested to apply for the Masters programme especially in Basic Health Care or HIV/AIDS Care and Prevention .I am laboratory technologist and working in Molocular laboratory as a National coordinator of Early Infant Diagnosis DNA – PCR Technology and Viral Load for adults in Ethiopian Health & Nutition research Institute. Please if you have any scholarship I am looking forward your email.
Thank you for your cooperation in advance
Mulu Girma
Why cant such type of scholarship open to Malawians since we share the same border with Tanzania.It is so because am also interested to apply for the Masters programme especially in Agriculture. Iam working as a senior officer in the department of agricultural research in Malawi
Thasnk you my name is Wilson Sande Nkhwazi.
First of all i would like to thank all of you and your institution for providing the scholarship information. My name is Ali Ebrahim. I am from Ethiopia which is part of east Africa. I have Bachelor of Arts from Haramaya University in economics at 2008.Now I am working in one project which is owned by different germen Ngos and the Ethiopian government under the ministry of capacity building. The project focuses on four areas which are private sector development, university reform, TVET system development and quality infrastructure.
Now i am very interested to continue my further education (master) if i can get any scholarship that relates to my field.Eventhough, I have high interest to continue my further education i have not the financial strength to do so that. Even it is very difficult in our country to have good daily life. SO i am very happy if you provide me with a scholarship any where. It may be in the fields of business adminstration, development economics, public adminstration, international trade, policy analysis and designing, macro economics and others
i am sure you will provide me any scholarship
With regards
[email protected]
I am Former Ardhi Institute graduate with Advanced Diploma in Land Management and valuation working with Government institution dealing with housing and provision of good accommodation to civil Servant .i would like to join the Institute of Housing Rotterdam for futther studies to enhance knowledge in imparting me with well and best use knowledge in Private and Public sector participatory development
Dear Sir/Madam,
I am a Tanzanian young boy 28 years of age. I completed my BSc degree in Agriculture 2007 with GPA 3.2 and currently am employed as Agriculture officer II having experience of approximately 2 years.
As far as I am dealing with the improvement of production of food and cash crops in Maswa district in Shinyanga region , then I am facing a lot of challenges due to changing of climate as well as outbreak of most pest and diseases that attack our crops aiming at food security in our country if not household level.
I sure if I will further my education in research basis i would be in a position to solve most the challenging problems in agriculture basing on Agro ecological zones.
Please I am waiting for your consideration so that I can apply.
Best Regards,
Anthony Gasper.