joseph sinde warioba vs stephen masatu wassira and another 1997 tzca 55 2 october 1997

joseph sinde warioba vs stephen masatu wassira and another 1997 tzca 55 2 october 1997

Section 114 of the Elections Act should be interpreted purposively to include 'corrupt practice' alongside 'illegal practice' for certification to the Director of Elections, as the omission was inadvertent and a literal reading would lead to absurd and discriminatory results contrary to legislative intent and the Constitution.

Citation
joseph sinde warioba vs stephen masatu wassira and another 1997 tzca 55 2 october 1997
Parties
Appellant: Joseph Godoro Mapunda; First Respondent: Stephen T. Wassira; Second Respondent: Attorney General
Court
TZCA
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
2 October 1997
Procedural Posture
Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From High Court Decision
Outcome
Appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Corrupt Practices in Elections, Certification of Electoral Offences, Purposive Statutory Interpretation, Discrimination Under the Constitution
Source Language
English
Election Law Statutory Interpretation Constitutional Law Corrupt Practices in Elections Certification of Electoral Offences Purposive Statutory Interpretation Discrimination Under the Constitution

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 8 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Joseph Godoro Mapunda

Appellant

Stephen T. Wassira

First Respondent

Attorney General

Second Respondent

Procedural Posture

Civil Appeal / Judgment on Appeal From High Court Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether section 114 of the Elections Act should be interpreted to require certification of corrupt practices to the Director of Elections
  2. 2 Whether omission of 'corrupt practice' in section 114 was inadvertent or deliberate
  3. 3 Whether literal interpretation of section 114 leads to absurd or discriminatory results

Ratio Decidendi

Section 114 of the Elections Act should be interpreted purposively to include 'corrupt practice' alongside 'illegal practice' for certification to the Director of Elections, as the omission was inadvertent and a literal reading would lead to absurd and discriminatory results contrary to legislative intent and the Constitution.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed

Orders

  • Direction to the trial Court to certify to the Director of Elections in terms of section 114(1) of the Elections Act that the respondent is guilty of corrupt practice.
  • Appellant awarded costs.