Tanzania Case Law

Hon

Court

TANZLII

The High Court lacks jurisdiction to entertain the petition because the acts complained of—namely, the suspension of the petitioner from Parliament—were conducted within the jurisdiction of the National Assembly under the Parliamentary Standing Orders and did not contravene any mandatory constitutional provisions. Article 100 of the Constitution and Section 5 of the Parliamentary Immunities, Powers, and Privileges Act bar the Court from questioning such parliamentary proceedings. The petition did not specifically challenge the constitutionality of any provision of the Standing Orders but rath…

Source excerpt

• Parliamentary privilege
• Separation of powers
• Judicial review
• Constitutional remedies
• Standing orders
• Jurisdiction

Read case analysis

zitto zuberi ruyagwa kabwe vs job ndugai speaker of the national assembly another 2021 tzhc 9535 7 october 2021

Court

TZHC

The C.A.G.'s immunity under Article 143(6) is limited to actions performed in the discharge of official duties as defined by the Constitution. The statement made during the media interview was not part of an official report or function protected by immunity. Therefore, the Speaker acted within constitutional and statutory powers in summoning the C.A.G. to appear before the parliamentary committee.

Source excerpt

• Parliamentary privilege
• Freedom of expression
• Immunity of public officers
• Separation of powers

Read case analysis

paul revocatus kaunda vs attorney general 2020 tzhc 4587 14 december 2020

Court

TZHC

Section 8(3) of BRADEA is constitutionally valid as it does not violate articles 13(2) & (3), 26(1) & (2), or 30(3) & (4) of the Constitution. A Bill is a proposal with no force of law and cannot infringe constitutional rights before enactment. The provision reflects the principle of separation of powers and the constitutional protection of parliamentary privilege. There was no evidence or circumstances shown by the petitioner to justify pre-enactment judicial intervention. The presumption of constitutionality applies, and the petitioner's arguments were unsupported by the pleadings or affida…

Source excerpt

• Constitutionality of legislation
• Separation of powers
• Judicial review
• Parliamentary privilege

Read case analysis

20171030 TZHC Dodoma

Court

TZHC

The High Court struck out a judicial review leave application, holding the supporting affidavit was defective and the pleadings contained fatal date errors.

• Judicial review
• Affidavit requirements
• Parliamentary privilege
• Exhaustion of remedies
• Preliminary objection
• Judicial-review

Read case analysis

20170710 TZHC Dodoma

Court

TZHC

The High Court dismissed a leave application for judicial review of parliamentary suspensions, holding that remedies were not exhausted and the affidavit was incompetent.

• Judicial review
• Parliamentary privilege
• Exhaustion of remedies
• Affidavit competency
• Constitutional challenge
• Judicial-review

Read case analysis

halima james mdee others vs job yustino ndugai the speaker of the national assembly of the united republic of tanzania 2017 tzhc 2245 10 july 2017

Court

TZHC

The High Court at Dodoma dismissed an application for leave to seek certiorari against parliamentary sanctions, holding that remedies were not exhausted and the affidavit was defective.

• Judicial review
• Parliamentary privilege
• Exhaustion of remedies
• Constitutionality
• Affidavit competency
• Judicial-review

Read case analysis

zziwa v secretary general of the east african community application 1 of 2016 2016 eacj 122 24 june 2016

Court

EACJ

The EACJ dismissed an application for witness summons, holding that summons cannot be used to bypass the Assembly’s refusal to grant leave under Section 20.

• Parliamentary privilege
• Separation of powers
• Judicial procedure
• Witness summons
• Eala (powers and privileges) act section 20
• Treaty interpretation

Read case analysis

andrew john chenge vs public leaders ethics secretariat others 2015 tzhc 2107 26 june 2015

Court

TZHC

The High Court lacks jurisdiction to entertain the petition as it seeks to challenge National Assembly resolutions and proceedings protected by absolute parliamentary privilege under Article 100(1) of the Constitution. The petitioner had alternative remedies under rule 68 of the Standing Orders and cannot benefit from a court order in a suit to which he was not a party. No cause of action is established against the respondents.

Source excerpt

• Parliamentary privilege
• Separation of powers
• Alternative remedies
• Right to be heard
• Judicial review

Read case analysis

mrema vs speaker of national assembly another 1998 tzhc 7 27 july 1998

Court

TZHC

The Court held that the suspension of the applicant was a matter of internal parliamentary procedure protected by Article 100(1) of the Constitution and the Parliamentary Privileges Act. The Court has no jurisdiction to inquire into such proceedings unless Parliament acts outside its constitutional powers or without jurisdiction, which was not established in this case. The application was therefore unmaintainable.

Source excerpt

• Parliamentary privilege
• Judicial review
• Separation of powers
• Suspension of member of parliament
• Fundamental rights

Read case analysis

19980727 TZHC Dar es Salaam

Court

TZHC

The Court held that it has no jurisdiction to inquire into or stay the implementation of a Parliamentary resolution suspending a Member of Parliament, as such matters fall within the exclusive domain of Parliament under Article 100(1) of the Constitution and the Parliamentary Privileges Act. The suspension was a disciplinary action within the powers of Parliament and did not violate the applicant's constitutional rights.

Source excerpt

• Parliamentary privilege
• Judicial review
• Separation of powers
• Suspension of member of parliament
• Fundamental rights

Read case analysis