republic vs frid hadi ahmed others 2017 tzca 386 5 july 2017

republic vs frid hadi ahmed others 2017 tzca 386 5 july 2017

Subordinate courts have no jurisdiction to deliberate and decide legal matters during committal proceedings for offences triable by the High Court; such matters must be reserved for the High Court. The High Court erred in directing the subordinate court to determine issues beyond its powers.

Source-derived case information.

Citation
republic vs frid hadi ahmed others 2017 tzca 386 5 july 2017
Parties
Applicant: The Republic; Respondent: Farid Hadi Ahmed; Respondent: Jamal Noordin Swalehe; Respondent: Nassor Hamad Abdallah; Respondent: Hassan Bakari Suleimani; Respondent: Antari Humud Ahamed; Respondent: Mohamed Isihaka Yussuph; Respondent: Abdallah Hassani @ Jibaba; Respondent: Hussein Mohamed Ally; Respondent: Juma Sadala Juma; Respondent: Said Kassim Ally; Respondent: Hamis Amour Salum; Respondent: Said Amour Salum; Respondent: Aboubakar Abdallah Mngodo; Respondent: Salum Ali Salumu; Respondent: Salum Amour Salum; Respondent: Alawi Othman Amir; Respondent: Rashid Ali Nyange @ Mapala; Respondent: Amir Hamis Juma; Respondent: Kassim Salum Nassoro; Respondent: Said Shehe Sharifu; Respondent: Mselem Ali Mselem; Respondent: Abdalla Said All @ Mdawa
Court
TZCA
Jurisdiction
Tanzania
Judgment Date
5 July 2017
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Committal Proceedings, Jurisdiction of Subordinate Courts, Terrorism Offences, Charge Defects
Source Language
english
Criminal Law Criminal Procedure Committal Proceedings Jurisdiction of Subordinate Courts Terrorism Offences Charge Defects

Source-derived case record

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 4 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Republic

Applicant

Farid Hadi Ahmed

Respondent

Jamal Noordin Swalehe

Respondent

Nassor Hamad Abdallah

Respondent

Hassan Bakari Suleimani

Respondent

Antari Humud Ahamed

Respondent

Mohamed Isihaka Yussuph

Respondent

Abdallah Hassani @ Jibaba

Respondent

Hussein Mohamed Ally

Respondent

Juma Sadala Juma

Respondent

Said Kassim Ally

Respondent

Hamis Amour Salum

Respondent

Said Amour Salum

Respondent

Aboubakar Abdallah Mngodo

Respondent

Salum Ali Salumu

Respondent

Salum Amour Salum

Respondent

Alawi Othman Amir

Respondent

Rashid Ali Nyange @ Mapala

Respondent

Amir Hamis Juma

Respondent

Kassim Salum Nassoro

Respondent

Said Shehe Sharifu

Respondent

Mselem Ali Mselem

Respondent

Abdalla Said All @ Mdawa

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the subordinate court had jurisdiction to deliberate and decide legal matters during committal proceedings
  2. 2 Whether the High Court erred in directing the subordinate court to determine issues ultra vires its powers

Ratio Decidendi

Subordinate courts have no jurisdiction to deliberate and decide legal matters during committal proceedings for offences triable by the High Court; such matters must be reserved for the High Court. The High Court erred in directing the subordinate court to determine issues beyond its powers.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed

Orders

  • decision of the High Court quashed
  • Resident Magistrates Court directed to proceed with the case from where it ended before the application for revision