odero charles odero vs director of public prosecutions attorney general 2022 tzhc 15331 19 december 2022

odero charles odero vs director of public prosecutions attorney general 2022 tzhc 15331 19 december 2022

The petition was dismissed because the petitioner failed to adduce evidence, either by affidavit or oral testimony, to substantiate the allegations that the practice of instituting criminal cases before completion of investigations violates Articles 9 and 59B of the Constitution. Arguments and references to other cases or statements by leaders could not substitute for evidence. The Constitution does not require investigations to be completed before prosecution is instituted.

Citation
odero charles odero vs director of public prosecutions attorney general 2022 tzhc 15331 19 december 2022
Parties
Petitioner: Odero Charles Odero; 1st Respondent: Director of Public Prosecutions; 2nd Respondent: The Attorney General
Court
TZHC
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
19 December 2022
Procedural Posture
Miscellaneous Civil Cause / Judgment
Outcome
Petition dismissed
Legal Topics
Institution of Criminal Proceedings, Burden of Proof in Constitutional Petitions, Role and Powers of Director of Public Prosecutions, Public Interest Litigation
Source Language
English
Constitutional Law Criminal Procedure Institution of Criminal Proceedings Burden of Proof in Constitutional Petitions Role and Powers of Director of Public Prosecutions Public Interest Litigation

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Odero Charles Odero

Petitioner

Director of Public Prosecutions

1st Respondent

The Attorney General

2nd Respondent

Procedural Posture

Miscellaneous Civil Cause / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether instituting criminal cases before completion of investigations violates Articles 9 and 59B of the Constitution
  2. 2 Whether sufficient evidence was led to establish the alleged constitutional violations

Ratio Decidendi

The petition was dismissed because the petitioner failed to adduce evidence, either by affidavit or oral testimony, to substantiate the allegations that the practice of instituting criminal cases before completion of investigations violates Articles 9 and 59B of the Constitution. Arguments and references to other cases or statements by leaders could not substitute for evidence. The Constitution does not require investigations to be completed before prosecution is instituted.

Court Disposition

Petition dismissed

Orders

  • Petition dismissed without orders as to costs