| dc.creator |
Makulilo, Alexander B. |
|
| dc.date |
2016-05-09T20:07:57Z |
|
| dc.date |
2016-05-09T20:07:57Z |
|
| dc.date |
2009 |
|
| dc.date.accessioned |
2018-03-27T09:11:38Z |
|
| dc.date.available |
2018-03-27T09:11:38Z |
|
| dc.identifier |
Makulilo, A.B., 2009. “Whose Affirmative Action is Affirmative?” Lessons from Tanzania. CEU Political Science Journal, 4(4), pp.412-416. |
|
| dc.identifier |
http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11810/1917 |
|
| dc.identifier.uri |
http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11810/1917 |
|
| dc.description |
Elections in Tanzania have resulted into the
underrepresentation of women in the formal decision making
organs particularly the parliament. To address this problem
the government introduced women special seats as one of the
ways to empower women to participate in making decisions
that affect their concerns. The threshold level for such special
seats was set at 15 percent in the 1995 elections, 20 percent
in the 2000 elections and it was increased to 30 percent of all
the parliamentary seats in the 2005 elections. This article
argues that while there is a positive trend in terms of the
numerical representation via an affirmative action system, the
same is yet to be owned by women themselves. The
affirmative action in Tanzania is strategically used to divide
women and to further the interests of political parties,
particularly the ruling party. Thus, women struggles for their
inclusion in the formal decision making organs should
simultaneously demand for the need to owning the affirmative
action itself. |
|
| dc.language |
en |
|
| dc.title |
“Whose Affirmative Action is Affirmative?” Lessons from Tanzania |
|
| dc.type |
Journal Article, Peer Reviewed |
|