zitto zuberi kabwe vs president of the united republic of tanzania 2022 tzhc 15339 5 december 2022
Section 6(1) of the Public Audit Act, by introducing a fixed term of five years (renewable once) for the Controller and Auditor General, is inconsistent with Article 144(1) of the Constitution, which guarantees tenure until the age of 65 or removal only through the constitutional process. The removal of the 4th respondent before attaining 65 years, based on the expiry of a fixed term, was unconstitutional. The appointment of the 3rd respondent, though challenged, was not declared unconstitutional as it was overtaken by events and not based on lack of qualifications.
- Citation
- zitto zuberi kabwe vs president of the united republic of tanzania 2022 tzhc 15339 5 december 2022
- Parties
- Petitioner: Zitto Zuberi Kabwe; 1st Respondent: The President of the United Republic of Tanzania; 2nd Respondent: The Hon. Attorney General; 3rd Respondent: Charles Kichere; 4th Respondent: Prof. Mussa Juma Assad
- Court
- TZHC
- Jurisdiction
- Tanzania
- Judgment Date
- 5 December 2022
- Procedural Posture
- Constitutional Petition / Judgment
- Outcome
- Petition allowed in part; section 6(1) of the Public Audit Act declared unconstitutional and struck out; removal of 4th respondent declared unconstitutional; appointment of 3rd respondent not declared unconstitutional; no order as to costs.
- Legal Topics
- Security of Tenure, Judicial Review, Removal of Public Officers, Interpretation of Statutes, Supremacy of Constitution
- Source Language
- English
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Zitto Zuberi Kabwe
Petitioner
The President of the United Republic of Tanzania
1st Respondent
The Hon. Attorney General
2nd Respondent
Charles Kichere
3rd Respondent
Prof. Mussa Juma Assad
4th Respondent
Procedural Posture
Constitutional Petition / Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether section 6(1) of the Public Audit Act No. 11 of 2008 is unconstitutional for violating Article 144(1) of the Constitution
- 2 Whether the removal of the 4th respondent from the office of Controller and Auditor General before attaining the age of 65 years was unconstitutional
- 3 Whether the appointment of the 3rd respondent as Controller and Auditor General was unconstitutional
Ratio Decidendi
Section 6(1) of the Public Audit Act, by introducing a fixed term of five years (renewable once) for the Controller and Auditor General, is inconsistent with Article 144(1) of the Constitution, which guarantees tenure until the age of 65 or removal only through the constitutional process. The removal of the 4th respondent before attaining 65 years, based on the expiry of a fixed term, was unconstitutional. The appointment of the 3rd respondent, though challenged, was not declared unconstitutional as it was overtaken by events and not based on lack of qualifications.
Court Disposition
Petition allowed in part; section 6(1) of the Public Audit Act declared unconstitutional and struck out; removal of 4th respondent declared unconstitutional; appointment of 3rd respondent not declared unconstitutional; no order as to costs.
Orders
- Section 6(1) of the Public Audit Act No. 11 of 2008 is declared null and void and struck out forthwith.
- Removal of the 4th respondent from the office of Controller and Auditor General before attaining 65 years is declared unconstitutional.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment