REGINALD SANKA AND OTHERS 222222 EDITED

IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA IN THE SUB-REGISTRY OF MANYARA AT BABATI MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION NO. 21910 OF 2024 IN THE MATTER OF AN APPLICATION FOR LEAVE TO APPLY FOR ORDERS OF CERTIORARI, MANDAMUS AND PROHIBITION IN THE MATTER OF LAW REFORM (FATAL ACCIDENTSAND MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS) ACT CAP. 310 IN THE MA TTER OF LA W REFORM (FATAL ACCIDENTS AND MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS) (JUDICIAL REVIEW, PROCEDURE AND FEES) RULES, 2014) IN THE MA TTER OF THE CEREALS AND OTHER PROCEDURE ACT 2009 BETWEEN REGINALD TLATLAA SANKA....................................................................................1stAPPLICA JACKOSN JOHN LULU............................................................................................. 2ndAPPLICA ATHUMANI KARUNDE MDEME............................................................................... 3rdAPPLICA LUCAS TARMO AMSI................................................................................................ 4thAPPLICA BOAY QADWE ORRI.................................................................................................. 5thAPPLICA VICENT SLAAG INYO................................................................................................6thAPPLICA STEPHEN ALEX MALIMUNGU................................................................................... 7thAPPLICA ALEX MATHAYO......................................................................................................... 8thAPPLICA DORCUS SUMNI........................................................................................................ 9thAPPLICA LOMNYAKI RASIRASI............................................................................................. 10™APPLICA DANIEL SEHHA BALOHO......................................................................................... 11™APPLICA PASKALI JOSEPH BURA.........................................................................................12™APPLICA FRANSIS MATHIAS DOMEL.................................................................................... 13™APPLICA JOSHUA MOLLEL......................................................................................................14™APPLICA MANGA LORICO....................................................................................15™ APPLICANT RAJABU RAYMOND................................................................................................ 16™APPLICA 1 EVARIST NICHODEMUS............................................................. 17™ APPLICANT PHILIPO FABIANO......................................................................................... 18™APPLICANT TUMAINI KOMBO...........................................................................................19™APPLICANT BERNADO CLEMENTINI AKONAAY............................................................. 20™APPLICANT ATHUMANI MAROBO............................................................ 21st APPLICANT LLY MSILAGI................................................................................................... 22ndAPPLICANT JACKSONE MANYERESA............................................................................. 23rdAPPLICANT DANIEL ADAMU SALIMU..............................................................................24™APPLICANT PASCAL MLANGWA........................................................................................ 25™APPLICANT OMARY BARAN...................................................................... 26™ APPLICANT ISA YA MANGA............................................................................................... 27™APPLICANT BARAKA YOHANA......................................................................................... 28™APPLICANT ZEPHANIA JOSEPH.......................................................................................29™APPLICANT SADIKI RASHIDI MTALI..............................................................................30™APPLICANT BOMBO ANTONI GENAY................................................................................. 31stAPPLICANT MATHAYO AKONAAY BAYO.......................................................................... 32ndAPPLICANT KALIST DIAY..................................................................................................... 33rdAPPLICAN PASKALI JOHN DIAY...................................................................................... 34™APPLICANT MARTHA KIFALUKA........................................................................................ 35™APPLICANT NASSARY WENSESLAUS...............................................................................36™APPLICANT STELLA TADEY................................................................................................ 37™APPLICANT ELIZABETH SHIRIMA.....................................................................................38™APPLICANT EMMNAUEL BOAY........................................................................................... 39™APPLICANT CESILIA TEMBA....................................................................... 40™ APPLICANT HAFIDHI HASAN MJEJA................................................................................ 41stAPPLICANT ISIDOR DAHAYE SIQIS.......................................................... 42nd APPLICANT PAULO ALPHONCE.......................................................................................... 43rdAPPLICANT ANJELA MAKUNDI.......................................................................................... 44™APPLICANT NICOLAUS BENEDICT AKONAAY.................................................................... 45™APPLICANT EMANUEL MEFUNYA...................................................................................... 46™APPLICANT 2 ADAM TANDU 47th APPLICANT ANDREA STEPHANO 48th APPLICANT AUGUSTINO MUHALE 49th APPLICANT IBRAIHM MANGI 50th APPLICANT PETER GIRANGAY 51st APPLICANT YOHANA MKWANYI 52nd APPLICANT BARAKA YAMBI 53rd APPLICANT ERASTO CHALES 54th APPLICANT MARTIN SENGE 55th APPLICANT KANGO KARATA 56th APPLICANT VICTOR MCHAKI 57th APPLICANT MONYAICHI MUSHI 58th APPLICANT LEMBURIS LUCAS 59th APPLICANT SWALEHE MEMBI 60th APPLICANT PAULO BLASY 61? APPLICANT YUDA PETER AKONAAY 62nd APPLICANT KALISTI YUDA 63rd APPLICANT RAMADHANI HANGALI 64th APPLICANT ENTI MORINGA 65th APPLICANT EMANUEL MANGA 66th APPLICANT MNANURA PAGWEJE 67th APPLICANT SEURILEBARANI 68th APPLICANT BRUNO LEGUTWA 69th APPLICANT LOSHILIYE MAIBUKO 70th APPLICANT SUNGURA MAIBUKO 71st APPLICANT BAKARI BARIE 72nd APPLICANT JUMA HANGALI TLAQAS 73rd APPLICANT GABRIEL MARTIN 74th APPLICANT MICHAELISSARA 75th APPLICANT PAULO ISSARA 76th APPLICANT 3 SAMWEL MBISE 77th APPLICANT ISAY A MBOYO 78th APPLICANT JOSEPH MORINGA 79th APPLICANT LALAHE SAILEVU 80th APPLICANT YUSTINIJOSEPH 81st APPLICANT MSEE LENGIYO 82nd APPLICANT JOHN PHILIPO 83rd APPLICANT FAUDHIA MUSA 84th APPLICANT ASHA BURA 85th APPLICANT RITTA WEMA 86th APPLICANT JOISI JULIAS 87th APPLICANT JOISI ADANI 88th APPLICANT MARY NADA 89th APPLICANT JULIETH WEMA 90th APPLICANT ELIZABETH PAULO 91 APPLICANT EMANUELI MILISHILI 92nd APPLICANT TIMOTHEO LUCIANAI 93rd APPLICANT RICHARD ADIELI 94th APPLICANT LEMTUYE SAVIYO 95th APPLICANT RAJABU JUMANNE 96th APPLICANT JOSEPH SELEMANI 97th APPLICANT MURAN NAIBALA 98th APPLICANT JUMBE LESOLA 99th APPLICANT HIITIJELLA 100th applicant GINE STINO 101?' APPLICANT ADAMU ISSA 102nd APPLICANT YOHANA P. SULEY 103rd APPLICANT TALIANI HANGALI 104th APPLICANT ABEL PAULO 105th APPLICANT PHILIPO SIMON 106th APPLICANT 4 KASIMU JUMA LAMA........................................................ 107'" APPLICANT GUDILATHADE MASSAWE............................................... 108™ APPLICANT PRAEXIDI EDIMUND MOSHA........................................... 109™ APPLICANT DASTANI MURRO.............................................................. 110™ APPLICANT VERONICA DANCAN......................................................... Ill™ APPLICANT JACKLINE KOKA................................................................. 112™ APPLICANT KADENGE J. PANGA...........................................................113™ APPLICANT DAMIANO DANIEL............................................................. 114™ APPLICANT IDI HILONGA....................................................................... 115™ APPLICANT AUGUSTINO MAJAWA........................................................ 116™ APPLICANT LAURENT WEMA SHAURI................................................... 117™ APPLICANT HAPPINES KASBETH MREMI............................................. 118™ APPLICANT IDDI B. HUSSEIN................................................................. 119™ APPLICANT DAMIANO HHAWU AMMA..................................................120™ APPLICANT RHOBET S. MURATHA......................................................... 121st APPLICANT VERSUS MINISTRY FOR AGRICULTURE............................................... 1st RESPONDENT MINISTRY OF INDUSTRY AND TRADE................................... 2nd RESPONDENT MINISTRY FOR FINANCE.......................................................... 3rd RESPONDENT MINISTRY OF REGIONAL ADMINISTRATION AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT...................................................... 3rd RESPONDENT THE HON. ATTORNEY GENERAL.............................................. 4™ RESPONDENT RULING 17th and 25th September, 2024. Kahyoza, J. This ruling is respect of an ex-parte application for leave to apply for certiorari to quash the Respondents' directives namely "Mwongozo wa 5 Biashara Zao la Dengu Mbaazi, soya na ufuta Toleo la 3-2024." The applicants intend to apply for the order of mandamus to compel the Respondents to accord the applicants with the right to be heard to agree on the price and payments terms of their crops and afford them an opportunity to equal opportunity as citizens to be able to trade their crops produce including but not limited to sunflower (alizeti) chickpeas, pigeon peas, soya beans and sesame seed in the open market and the manner they deem fit and desirable. Mr. Mfinga, the applicants advocate submitted that the Respondents issued the guidelines to prohibit the applicants to sell their crops to the free market. He contended that the application is competent as per rule 5(1) of the Law Reform (Fatal Accidents and Miscellaneous Provisions) (Judicial Review Procedure and Fees) Rules, 2014 G.N. No. 324/2014 which requires a party who wish to apply for prerogative orders to first apply for leave. To support his contention, he cited the case of Emma Bayo v. The Minister for Labour and Youth Development and 2 Others, Civil Appeal No. 79 of 2012. The Court of Appeal held that leave must sought and granted before a party applies for prerogative remedy. He submitted that the applicants are required to establish that the case is arguable, that the application was filed within a period for six month and that the applicants have sufficient interest in the matter. The conditions for leave were stated in the case of Emma Bayo v. The Minister for Labour and Youth Development and 2 Others, (supra). The applicants have proved in the affidavit and statement in support of the application. Starting with the first test, the applicants have established that have an arguable matter as they are small to medium farmers and 6 engaged in trading of among other crops, sunflowers, chickpeas, pigeon peas soya beans and sesame seed. The respondents on 22. 5. 2024 issued the guidelines (Mwongozo) covering all traders of among other crops sunflowers, chickpeas, pigeon peas soya beans and sesame seed to arbitrary trade and sell all crops to Agricultural and Marketing Cooperative Societies (AMCOS). The Mwongozo was implemented from 4th August against the applicants, who have failed to trade their crops in the manner they have been directed by the said Mwongozo. The implementation of Mwongozo was by arresting the applicants, seizing the applicants' crops and vehicles. Additionally, the applicants' advocate contended that the respondents have no right to compel the applicants to be members of the AMCOS to trade their crops. The respondents' conduct is contrary to Art. 20(1) of the Constitution of the URT which grant the freedom of association to the citizens. The said Mwongozo curtailed the applicants' right to trade their crops as they wish. The applicants are not willing to join any society. The respondents have been arresting them and seizing their crops if they find them selling their crops. As to the second requirement, the applicants were never given an opportunity to be heard before the Mwongozo was passed which affects their affairs directly. They were not in agreement as to the price of their crops and the payment terms. The Mwongozo violates Art. 13 (6) (a)of the Constitution of the United Republic of Tanzania. Since the passing of the said Mwongozo, the applicants' constitution right has been jeopardized as they cannot trade their crops freely like any other citizen of Tanzania. The Mwongozo is discriminatory and irrational. He prayed the court to take 7 inspiration from the case of Iddi Haruni v. The Permanent Secretary President's Office Public Service Management and Good Governance and three others, Mise. Cause No. 59/2022. at page 10. As to the third test, the applicants' advocate submitted that the applicants are required to show interest in the case. Interest may be shown by the applicants establishing that how they will be affected by the action of the administrative authority. This position was stated in the case of Iddi Haruni. The applicants have shown in the affidavit that they are trading in among other crops sunflowers, chickpeas, pigeon peas soya beans and sesame seed and the Mwongozo covers the said crops. The respondents have since August, 2024 restricted the applicants from trading in the said crops. They have seized their motor vehicles, removed plate numbers and seized their crops. The applicants have direct interest, the applicants' advocate contended. The purpose for applying for leave is to filter out applications which are groundless. This position was stated in the book "JUDICIAL REMEDIES IN PUBLIC LAW Second Edition by Clive Lewis at page 263 it is stated, thus- "The requirement of permission is designed to filter out applications which are groundless or hopeless at an early stage. The purpose is to prevent the time of the court being wasted by busy bodies with misguided or trivial complaints of administrative error and to remove the uncertainty in which public .... ” The learned author goes on to state that factors to be considered in determining whether to grant permission are- 8 1. The applicant must demonstrate that there is an arguable case that a ground for seeking judicial review exists; 2. The applicant is required to show sufficient interest in the matter to which the application relates; 3. That the applicant has acted promptly; 4. The applicant has to show that there is no remedy which exists. The conditions for granting leave discussed by the learned author are like the conditions stated considered by the Court of Appeal in Emma Bayo v. The Minister for Labour & Youths Development and Others, Civil Appeal No. 79 of 2012. In that case the Court of Appeal stated that- "It is at the stage of leave where the High Court satisfies itself that, the applicant for leave has made out any arguable case to justify the filing of the main application. At the stage of leave the High Court is also required to consider whether the applicant is within the six months limitation period within which to seek a judicial review of the decision of a tribunal subordinate to the High Court. At the leave stage is where the applicant shows that he or she has sufficient interest to be allowed to bring the main application. These are the preliminary matters which the High Court sitting to determine the appellant's application for leave should have considered while exercising its judicial discretion to either grant or not to grant leave to the applicant/ appellant herein." ( Emphasis added) 9 I scrutinized the affidavit, and the attached documents to find out if the applicants established an arguable case. I am satisfied that the applicants have established that they have an arguable case. They have demonstrated how the Mwongozo has affected them and denied them the chance to trade in the specified crops as they wish. They contended that further that the respondents did not hear the applicants before they issued the Mwongozo. The applicants have proved on the face of it that they have interest in intended application as they are trader in the crops subject of Mwongozo. It is undisputable that the applicants have instituted the application for leave within six months of the date of the order sought to be challenged by way of prerogative remedy. In my considered view, I find that the application has met the threshold of granting an application for leave. Consequently, I grant leave to the applicants to apply for prerogative orders of certiorari and mandamus within 14 days from the date of this ruling. I so order. Dated at Babati this 25th day of September, 2024. Court: Ruling delivered in the presence of several applicants and their advocate Mr. Mfina. B/C. Ms. Fatina (RMA) present. io John R. Kahyoza Judge 24. 9. 2024 11