jetha edwin athamn vs mohamed saidi sinani others 2007 tzhc 243 26 july 2007

IN THE HIGH COURT OF TANZANIA

AT MTWARA MISC CIVIL CAUSE NO. 1/2005 In the matter of Election Petition pursuant to the National Election Act, CAP 343 (R.E.2002) JETHA EDWIN A TH M A N ............... PETITION

VERSUS MOHAMED SAIDI SINANI ) THE HON. ATTORNEY GENERAL)- - RESPONDENTS DIRECTOR OF ELECTIONS ) Date of Last Order: 28/8/2007 Date of Ruling: 28/8/2007

RULING SHANGALI, J. On 29th December, 2005, the petitioner JETHA EDWIN ATHMAN presented and filed this Election petition Misc. Civil Cause No. 1 of 2005 seeking for a declaration that the elections for Mtwara mjini constituency held on 14th December 2005 in which the first Respondent MOHAMEDI SAIDI SINANI was declared the winner was null and void due to the illegal and corrupt practices engineered and committed by the claimed winner. In accordance to the practice the second respondent is the HON. ATTORNEY GENERAL and the third respondent is THE DIRECTOR OF ELECTIONS. In early 2006, the petitioner filed Misc. Civil petition Application No. 1 of 2006 under section 11 l(5)(b) of the Election Act, praying for waiver of the requirement o f deposit in court for security of costs.. That application was thrown out by this Court on preliminary objection because the petitioner/applicant was supposed to comply first with the provision of section 111(3) of the Election Act, by applying for determination of the amount to be payable as security for costs before embarking into application for the 1 exemption for security for costs under section 111(5) o f the Act. The ruling of this Court was pronounced back on 24th July, 2006. Since that period no other step has been taken by the petitioner and this petition has been lingering in this court while the petitioner has decided to be no show

person. Section 111(3) o f the Election Act, required him to file his application for determination o f the amount payable as security for costs within a period of fourteen days (14) after filing his petition. This petition was filed on 29th December 2005 and the petitioner has todate not yet complied with that requirement o f the law. Practically, and without exaggerations the petitioner has decided to abandon his petition and stayed a loof after loosing interest to pursue the matter. At this juncture, and in my view, Mr. Mgengeli, Learned State Attorney resepresenting the second and third respondents has an ordained justification to request this court to dismiss this petition with costs for lack o f prosecution. Without hesitation, I hereby grant the application. The petition is hereby dismissed with costs. The petitioner and the first respondent to be notified. It is so ordered. M.S. Sifafagali ;e 28/8/2007 th Ruling delivered todate 28 August 2007 at 1.00 pm in the presence of Mr. Mgengeli, Learned State Attorney and in the absence of the petitioner and first respondent. 28/8/2007. 2 i Date: 26/7/2007 Coram: G.J.K. Mjemmas, J. Mr. M. Luena, State Attorney for the Republic Appellant - Present B/Clerk - V.L. Mineche Mr. Luena: This matter/appeal is coming up for judgment. Order: Judgment delivered today 26/7/2007 in the presence of the appellant and Respondent-Republic represented by Mr. Luena learned State Attorney. 8