Tanzania Case Law

WILFRED WERANDUM MASSAWE 2 RULING

Court

TANZLII

The bail conditions set by the Dodoma Resident Magistrate Court are fair, manageable, and justified by the seriousness of the offences. Varying the conditions for the applicant alone would violate the principle of equality before the law and constitute discrimination among co-accused. No solid grounds were presented to warrant the exercise of the High Court's discretion to vary the bail terms.

Source excerpt

• Bail
• Variation of bail conditions
• Equality before the law
• Presumption of innocence
• Discretionary powers of court

Read case analysis

chalula v united republic of tanzania 0032018 2025 afchpr 6 5 february 2025

Court

TANZLII

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.

• Death penalty
• Right to life
• Right to dignity
• Right to fair trial
• Non-discrimination
• Equality before the law

Read case analysis

fory v republic of cote divoire application no 0042021 2025 afchpr 7 5 february 2025

Court

TANZLII

The African Court found this human rights application inadmissible because the applicant had not exhausted local remedies, though it confirmed jurisdiction.

• Right to fair trial
• Exhaustion of local remedies
• Freedom of association
• Equality before the law
• Judicial independence
• Exhaustion-of-local-remedies

Read case analysis

ayed v tunisian republic application no 0082019 2025 afchpr 9 5 february 2025

Court

TANZLII

The application is inadmissible because the Applicant failed to exhaust available and effective local remedies as required by Article 56(5) of the Charter and Rule 50(2)(e) of the Rules; the Applicant could have pursued direct action before domestic courts under Tunisian law.

Source excerpt

• Exhaustion of local remedies
• Jurisdiction of regional courts
• Right to fair trial
• Non-discrimination
• Equality before the law

Read case analysis

ayed c republique tunisienne requete no 0082019 2025 afchpr 10 5 fevrier 2025

Court

TANZLII

The applicant did not exhaust available domestic remedies as required by Article 56(5) of the Charter and Rule 50(2)(e) of the Rules, since he could have pursued further judicial actions under national law. The application is therefore inadmissible.

Source excerpt

• Non-discrimination
• Equality before the law
• Fair trial
• Right to information
• Access to public service
• Right to health

Read case analysis

fory v republique de cote divoire application no 0042021 2025 afchpr 8 5 fevrier 2025

Court

TANZLII

The application is inadmissible because the applicant failed to exhaust available domestic remedies, specifically the right to appeal the first instance judgment, as required by Article 56 of the Charter and Rule 50(2)(e) of the Rules.

Source excerpt

• Right to fair trial
• Exhaustion of domestic remedies
• Freedom of association
• Judicial independence
• Equality before the law

Read case analysis

kalonge v united republic of tanzania application no 0242018 2024 afchpr 28 13 november 2024

Court

TANZLII

The African Court held that Tanzania’s mandatory death penalty and hanging as a method of execution violated the rights to life and dignity.

• Death penalty
• Right to life
• Right to dignity
• Fair trial
• Mandatory sentencing
• Method of execution

Read case analysis

dembele and others v republic of mali application no 0232017 2024 afchpr 10 4 june 2024

Court

TANZLII

The African Court found no violation in Mali’s refusal to regularise police officers’ promotion and training applications, and dismissed the case.

• Equality before the law
• Non-discrimination
• Access to public service
• Promotion in public employment
• Right to education
• Exhaustion of local remedies

Read case analysis

MASHALA

Court

TANZLII

The applicants are entitled to bail as the offences charged are bailable, the amount involved exceeds the subordinate court's jurisdiction, and there are no compelling reasons to deny bail. The court is empowered to grant bail to all eligible accused, including those who did not formally apply, to ensure parity and avoid conflicting decisions. Bail is granted subject to strict statutory and court-imposed conditions.

Source excerpt

• Bail
• Economic and organised crime
• Jurisdiction
• Presumption of innocence
• Equality before the law

Read case analysis

joran lwehabura bashange vs minister for constitutiona legal affairs anotherl 2024 tzhc 774 13 march 2024

Court

TZHC

Section 44(1) and (2) of the Law of Limitation Act are void to the extent of their inconsistency with the Constitution, as they confer judicial powers on the Executive, lack procedural safeguards, deny the right to be heard, are discriminatory, arbitrary, and create legal absurdity. These provisions violate Articles 13(1), (2), (3), (6)(a), 26(1), and 29(1) of the Constitution, as well as domesticated international human rights instruments. The absence of procedural fairness, right of appeal, and the potential for bias render the provisions unconstitutional.

Source excerpt

• Separation of powers
• Judicial review
• Equality before the law
• Due process
• Right to be heard
• Extension of limitation periods

Read case analysis