Search judgments by proposition, citation, court, judge or legal topic, then move directly into the source-grounded case analysis.
Results update automatically as you type.
Tanzania decisions
Decisions matching the current search
The Court held Tanzania violated the Applicant’s rights to life and dignity in relation to a mandatory death sentence and hanging, but rejected other claims.
The arrêté du 22 juillet 2019, by prohibiting issuance of civil documents to persons sought by justice without a definitive conviction, creates a public perception of guilt and arbitrarily restricts access to proof of nationality, violating both the presumption of innocence and the right to nationality under applicable international instruments.
Source excerpt
Whether a petition is frivolous or vexatious is a matter of fact requiring evidence and cannot be determined as a pure point of law through a preliminary objection. The objection raised does not meet the threshold for a preliminary objection and is therefore dismissed.
Source excerpt
The application is inadmissible because the same matter—concerning the exclusion of pregnant girls and adolescent mothers from Tanzanian public schools—has already been settled by the African Committee of Experts on the Rights and Welfare of the Child (CAEDBE) in a decision addressing the same respondent, the same subject matter, and resulting in a decision on the merits. This satisfies the cumulative criteria for inadmissibility under Article 56(7) of the African Charter and Rule 50(2)(g) of the Rules of Court.
Source excerpt
The amendments to Articles 21(1), 39(1)(c), and 67(1)(b) of the Constitution, introduced by Act No. 34 of 1994, unreasonably and unnecessarily restrict the fundamental right of Tanzanian citizens to participate in government by requiring political party membership for presidential and parliamentary candidacy. These restrictions violate Articles 20(4) and 21(1) of the Constitution, fail the proportionality test, and are not justified by public interest or international law. The amendments are therefore unconstitutional and void.
Source excerpt
The amendments to Articles 21(1), 39(1)(c), and 67(1)(b) of the Constitution, introduced by Act No. 34 of 1994, which restrict candidacy for president and member of parliament to members of political parties only, are unconstitutional as they violate the fundamental rights to freedom of association and participation in government under Articles 20(4) and 21(1). The state failed to justify the necessity and proportionality of these restrictions, and the amendments also contravene international human rights instruments to which Tanzania is a party.
Source excerpt
The amendments to Articles 39 and 67 of the Constitution, introduced by Act No. 34 of 1994, restricting candidacy for president and parliament to political party members, are constitutional. The amendments were enacted within legislative competence, serve the legitimate aim of representative democracy, and do not violate fundamental rights or international instruments. The proportionality test is met, and the restriction is not arbitrary or discriminatory.
Source excerpt
Explore more
