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 adjournments dated 13.1.2025 and 17.1.2025 in bail proceedings were unjustifiable in terms of span and reasons, violating the applicant's right to timely justice. The High Court has jurisdiction to revise such proceedings even absent a final decision, and directs expeditious determination of bail objections.
Source excerpt
Applicants were detained at Central Police Station for more than 24 hours without bail or arraignment, violating statutory and constitutional provisions; such detention is unlawful and warrants release or arraignment.
Source excerpt
The African Court dismissed DRC’s request for expedited procedure, holding it could not abridge defence-related time limits, but listed the case for priority handling.
The African Court found Tanzania violated John Mwita’s rights to liberty and free legal assistance, but not his rights to be heard or to equality.
The African Court dismissed an application for provisional measures seeking a stay of sentence, finding the request would prejudge the merits of the fair-trial claims.
The respondent violated the applicant's right to legal assistance by failing to provide free counsel to an indigent accused facing a serious charge, and violated the right to liberty by statutory exclusion of judicial discretion for bail in armed robbery cases. No violation was found regarding equality, non-discrimination, or the right to have his cause heard, as national courts properly evaluated evidence and provided fair proceedings.
Source excerpt
The applicants demonstrated, through medical certificates and corroborating evidence, that their health is in a precarious state due to alleged torture and inadequate prison medical care, creating a real and imminent risk of irreparable harm. The urgency and extreme gravity conditions are met. The Court, exercising its discretion, finds it necessary to order suspension of detention to allow access to specialized medical treatment until completion of such treatment.
Source excerpt
The application is inadmissible because, at the time of filing, the applicants had not exhausted domestic remedies, as their appeal to the Court of Cassation was still pending. The Court has material competence, but the exhaustion requirement is not met, making it unnecessary to consider the merits or other admissibility criteria.
Source excerpt
The applicants are entitled to bail as the offence charged is bailable, they have not violated previous bail conditions, and there is no legal basis to deny bail under the Constitution and relevant statutes.
Source excerpt
Article 148(5)(b), (c), and (e) of the Tanzanian Criminal Procedure Code violate articles 1, 2, 7(1), and 7(1)(b) of the African Charter by imposing categorical restrictions on bail, depriving certain accused persons of judicial discretion and equal protection, resulting in discrimination and denial of fair hearing and presumption of innocence.
Source excerpt
Explore more
