"Fiat Justitia Ruat Caelum"

Dar: Court imprisons Ekelege for three years

Former Director General of the Tanzania Bureau of Standards (TBS), Charles Ekelege, has been sentenced to three years in prison and fined USD 42,543 (roughly70.2m/- at the current rate) after the Kisutu Resident Magistrate found him guilty in three counts including conducting motor vehicle inspection abroad.

Though in total he has been sentenced for three years – each count one year – the punishment is co-current and hence he will be behind the bars for only one year. 

He was charged with abuse of office and occasioning $42,543 (over 70.2 m/-) loss to the government when he approval a waiver beyond 2m/-  for two firms against board procedures.

The verdict was read yesterday by Resident Magistrate Augustina Mmbando who presided over the case.  She said the prosecution with the assistance of seven witnesses was able to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused committed the offence.

Before reading the verdict, Magistrate Mmbando asked the prosecution if they had any recommendation. 

Led by Janet Machulya, a state attorney representing the Prevention and Combating of Corruption Bureau (PCCB), the prosecution requested the court to met severe punishment to the accused.

Machulya claimed that the punishment would be a lesson to him and other public officials while carrying out their duties. She said the stiff punishment was taking into consideration the fact that Ekelege was given big responsibilities and that he failed to serve and caused a pecuniary loss to the government.

Praying for mitigation through his advocate Majura Magafu, Ekelege requested the court to reduce punishment because he has a family which depends on him and his parents are old and they all depend on him.

She said that the accused will serve one year in prison for the first count, one year for the second count and another one year for the third counts, and that all go co-current.

Delivering the judgment Magistrate Mmbando said that Ekelege while serving as the director general of TBS knew that his limit to approval waiver was up to 2m/- only and not more than that.

She said that Ekelege pretended that he was ignorant of the waiver and issued up to USD42, 543 to Quality Motors of Hong Kong and Jaffar Mohamed Ali Garage of Dubai.

Magistrate Mmbando said that Ekelege was aware of TBS procedures he was advised by Joshua Katabwa who is an engineer in the TBS Certification Department.
She said even if the accused was not to be told he had to know it on his own as the boss for the institution.

She said that the accused knew that he caused loss to TBS but he remained quiet up to the time of internal and external audit after several years after the auditor report. 

The magistrate noted that it was obvious that the application for the waiver was only presented to him, which he approved and implemented.
Mmbando further said that Ekelege during his defence lied to the court that Bethuel Matemba was present when approving the said application – while knowing that Matemba is dead.

 “As overall in charge who has experience and was appointed by President had the responsible to know his level of approving waiver is 2m/- and not more than that. He understands TBS regulation and that an amount like USD 42,543 should be done by the board,” noted the magistrate.

The vehicle inspection scam, which led to the suspension of the TBS boss, came to light in June 2012 after the Parastatal Organizations Accounts Committee (POAC), a parliamentary subcommittee, revealed that TBS inspect motor vehicles abroad contrary to its records and proclamations.

The parliamentary committee’s report showed that TBS provided the oversight team with wrong information on motor vehicle inspection offices in various countries.

SOURCE: THE GUARDIAN (Tanzania)

Uganda: Government issues new tough rules for private schools

Kampala:

No proprietor will be licensed to start a private secondary school unless they have at least seven full-time teachers—three of whom should be teaching sciences or mathematics. Also, whoever heads a school must be a university graduate.

The order is among a new set of guidelines the government has issued for people seeking to open private schools.

On enrolment, one will only be allowed to open a private primary school if they have at least 55 pupils enrolled in each class while the minimum number for secondary schools is 40 students per class.

According to Mr Ismail Mulindwa, an assistant commissioner in the Education ministry, the guidelines have been prompted by a recent survey which revealed that many private schools were operating in contravention of the Education Act 2008.

“These new guidelines will serve as benchmarks for our efforts to ensure quality in private sector education provision,” he said in an interview yesterday

New schools, according to the guidelines, will only be registered between October and December and registration certificate will be valid for only five years for secondary schools while primary schools will have to renew their certificates after every two years.

More requirements
“Proprietors intending to register their schools in any given year must ensure that their files are with us by June 30 of the previous year to enable us carry out inspection. Issuing of a new licence will only be done after revalidation of the school,” said Mr Mulindwa.

For boarding schools, dormitories will be inspected and issued with an occupancy permit before students are allowed to take residence. Also to be affected is the nomenclature of schools. No school will be allowed to tag the title “college” or ‘academy’ to its name.
A school will only use the title ‘college’ if its attached to a university or college to demonstrate skills taught there while an ‘academy’ will be one that offers a particular set of skills like military, music or drama.

Mr Mulindwa said although the guidelines are for new schools, the older ones will have to comply with the directives before their current licences are renewed. For those that already have the title ‘college’ or ‘academy’, he said would be advised to change names.

“It was oversight to allow them to operate but we shall sit with the proprietors and ask them to change the names,” he said

Reacting to the new guidelines, Mr Hassadu Kirabi, the head of research at the National Private Educational Institutions Association, protested the conditions on registration, saying they are unfair and will lock out many potential investors.

“We agree with other changes but the issue of putting a limit on the period we are supposed to register is unfair. Registration is not a one-day deal and given the paper work involved, they should leave it open,” he said yesterday.

In 2009, government closed a total of 398 schools for failure to meet minimum operational, safety and security standards as stipulated in the Education Act, 2008.

This followed several school fires which destroyed property worth billions and in some cases—deaths of students.

A recent report by the ministry revealed fewer private schools were adhering to set minimum standards compared to the public ones.

Overall, 45.8 per cent of schools inspected were rated fair, followed by 27.7 per cent as unsatisfactory, 25.2 per cent scored “good” while only 1.2 per cent were rated very good.

Also, grading of private schools in 2011 by government saw no school make it to the “excellent” category while only nine of the 2,073 made it to “class B”.

Some key rules

Ownership: Change of school ownership or location will only be allowed at the end of year to avoid interrupting school operations.

Qualification: Matrons must have a minimum academic qualification of primary seven and not below 30 years.

Security: School guards must be on surveillance of premises 24-hours and must have basic security knowledge.

Medical checkups: Matrons and school cooks must be examined medically every after six months.

Exits: Two emergency exits in each dormitory is a must.

Fire: Erect secure fence and installing fire protection systems. 

Sanitation: Dustbins and incinerators as well as erecting appropriate kitchens with utensils dying racks must be provided.

Names: School names with a relationship with other countries /organisations will only be used with explicit written permission from embassies of those countries.

Source: Daily Monitor (Uganda)

Somalia sues Kenya at top UN court over maritime border

Somalia took its maritime border dispute with Kenya to the United Nations' top court on Thursday, which could decide the fate of potentially lucrative oil and gas reserves off east Africa.

The dispute has been simmering for years, keeping investors away because of the lack of legal clarity over who owns potential offshore oil and gas reserves.

The internationally-backed government in Mogadishu is seeking to claw back authority over Somalia's territorial waters, including the area bordering Kenya that is potentially rich in oil and gas deposits.

Kenya, which has had troops in southern Somalia since 2011, first as an invading force and then as part of an African Union peacekeeping force, lays claim to a triangle of water stretching for more than 100,000 square kilometres (40,000 square miles) that Mogadishu also claims.

Nairobi has already awarded exploration contracts to international firms despite the legal uncertainty.

"Somalia requests the court 'to determine, on the basis of international law, the complete course of the single maritime boundary dividing all the maritime areas appertaining to Somalia and to Kenya in the Indian Ocean'," the International Court of Justice (ICJ) said in a statement.

Somalia, which lies to the north of Kenya, wants the maritime border to continue along the line of the land border, to the southeast.

Kenya however wants the sea border to go in a straight line east, giving it more sea territory.

Both countries have recognised the court's jurisdiction, the ICJ said, a prerequisite for cases there to continue.

"Diplomatic negotiations, in which their respective views have been fully exchanged, have failed to resolve this disagreement," the ICJ quoted Somalia as saying in its application.

Kenya's large military presence in Somalia is part of the African Union force supporting the country's fragile government.

Cases at the Hague-based court can take years.

Established in 1945, the ICJ is the UN's highest judicial body and the only one of five principal UN bodies not located in New York.

Source: Daily Nation Kenya & AFP

South Africa court orders release of tapes in Zuma corruption case

[JURIST] South Africa's Supreme Court of Appeals on Thursday ordered the release of taped phone conversations about corruption charges against President Jacob Zuma. Zuma had applied to prevent the tapes from being released while the opposition party, Democratic Alliance, sought access to them. The case has followed the leader since before he took office in 2009 and the conversations on the recordings were cited as a reason to drop fraud and corruption charges against Zuma before he became president. The prosecutor at the time said the conversations showed there was a political conspiracy against Zuma, but the recordings were never made public. Democratic Alliance leader Helen Zille applauded the court decision and said that her party will analyze the tapes to determine if there were legal reasons to withdraw the charges against Zuma. In 2009, the National Prosecuting Authority's acting director Mokotedi Mpshe said he dropped the charges against Zuma because of prosecutorial misconduct after Zuma's legal team brought him taped phone conversation allegedly between prosectors and a head of the now disbanded crime-fighting unit called the Scorpions about the charges and their timing. President Zuma's lawyers have argued that the Democratic Alliance party would use the tapes for political gain. Zuma also faces questions about $20 million in government money spent to upgrade his private rural home. South Africa's public prosecutor submitted a report suggesting that he pay back to the government a portion of the funds that were not spend on security upgrades.

Zuma was ousted as the country's deputy president in 2005 after an aide was convicted of corruption. He was also charged with rape, but he was ultimately acquitted and reinstated as African National Congress (ANC) deputy vice president. In July 2008 the South African Constitutional Court rejected a motion by Zuma to exclude evidence from the corruption trial. Zuma had argued that evidence seized in 2005 raids by the Directorate of Special Investigations should be thrown out because the raids violated his rights to privacy and a fair trial. The court upheld the warrants used in the raids, confirming a November 2007 decision by the Supreme Court of Appeal. He was first charged with corruption in 2005, but those charges were later dismissed because prosecutors failed to follow proper procedures.

Source: JURIST report

Bensouda given trial ultimatum over President Uhuru Kenyatta's ICC case

International Criminal Court judges have given Prosecutor Fatou Bensouda six days from Friday to confirm whether she is ready to have the trial of President Uhuru Kenyatta commence on October 7.

Judges Kuniko Ozaki (presiding), Robert Fremr and Geoffrey Henderson ordered Ms Bensouda to furnish them with information by September 5 on her readiness to proceed with the trial.

If Ms Bensouda indicates that she is not ready to start, there is the possibility that she could ask for more time, or that a window would open for President Kenyatta to file for dismissal of the case.

“Noting the importance of timely and efficient preparations and in order to provide the necessary guidance for parties and participants, the Chamber orders the prosecution to file a notice confirming whether it anticipates being in a position to start trial on the provisionally scheduled commencement date of October 7, 2014,” the order stated.

The order also requires the legal defence teams of President Kenyatta and victims of the post-election violence to file responses to the prosecution’s filing, if any, by September 10.

The ICC, in its March 31 decision on prosecution’s applications for a finding of non-compliance and for adjournment of the initial trial date had set October 7 as the provisional date for the commencement of the trial.

The provisional date was, however, heavily dependent on whether Ms Bensouda receives and analyses fresh evidence, President Kenyatta’s financial and property records, which her office had requested from the government.

So far, the government has only submitted President Kenyatta’s motor vehicle records during the period in question, telephone numbers used by the Head of State and bank records.

IRRELEVANT ISSUES

The rest of the items on the prosecution’s list, Attorney-General Githu Muigai has argued, are neither relevant nor necessary to the charges facing President Kenyatta, who is accused of having sponsored attacks against non-PNU supporters in the 2007/8 post-election violence. 

Ms Bensouda is demanding records of companies and properties owned by Mr Kenyatta. She also wants income tax and VAT returns and motor vehicle records that were registered in his name, companies or associates.

The prosecution also wants records of bank accounts held by Mr Kenyatta and his associates, foreign exchange transaction records, telephone records, as well as data on M-Pesa transaction between June 1, 2007 and December 15, 2010.

Ms Bensouda also seeks security and intelligence information records from the National Intelligence Service relating to Mr Kenyatta’s activities before and after the 2007/8 post-election violence.

Source: Daily Nation Kenya

Court stops repeat police recruitment at a centre in Kakamega

A High Court judge has temporarily stopped a repeat police recruitment that was to take place at Isanjiro Primary School in Malava, Kakamega County, on Monday.

Mr Justice Anthony Kaniaru, sitting in Kisumu, ordered on Wednesday afternoon that the process be halted until a case filed by 27 people who had succeeded in the first recruitment round is determined.

The recruits’ lawyer, Innocent Ondieki, told the court that the National Police Service Commission did not give them audience before declaring that the recruitment was marred by irregularities.

He said that his clients were successful in the drive organised on July 14 at the primary school that is in Malava, in northern Kakamega.

'IMPLAUSIBLE' REASONS

“They got their appointment letters and were to report to various police training colleges on September 5.

"However, the chairman of the National Police Service Commission cancelled the applicants’ enlisting to the national police service without according them the right to be heard on allegations of rampant corruption at the recruitment centre,” said Mr Ondieki.

The lawyer added that the commission had announced via radio that the recruitment would be repeated on September 1, which would negatively affect his clients because the reasons given were “neither plausible nor tangible”.

Justice Kaniaru ordered that the recruits file their case challenging the commission’s decision within 21 days.

SENATORS SUED

In the same court, an advocate who has sued all the 47 senators for passing a law that put them in control of County Development Boards was ordered to transfer his case from Bungoma to Nairobi.

Mr Barasa Kundu has filed a constitutional petition alongside two human rights activists, Mr Albert Simiyu and Mr Philip Wanyonyi, saying the Senate made an illegal amendment to the Constitution by passing the law.

He has also listed the Speakers of the Senate and National Assembly and the Attorney-General as the respondents. He argues that Attorney-General Githu Muigai misadvised the President to assent to the amendment.

Justice Kaniaru directed that it would be in the interest of the case to have it handled in Nairobi.

Source: Daily Nation Kenya

Arusha: Court orders hotel owner to pay $1.7m

Arusha. 

The owner of Snow Crest Hotel in Arusha has been ordered by the High Court to pay $1.7 million (about Sh. 3 billion) to a person who reportedly purchased the hotel some years ago but later backed out.

The Commercial Division of the court in its ruling on Friday ordered Wilfred Tarimo to pay Grand Alliance Limited the said amount for alleged infringement in the 2011 sale of the property.

High Court Judge Robert Makaramba in his judgment said the defendant breached the share acquisition agreement of September 5, 2011 during which the hotel was to change hands.

James Ndika, a Dar es Salaam-based businessman and managing director of Grand Alliance Ltd. had on the said date entered into an acquisition agreement of the facility by buying 61 per cent shares.

The plaintiff later backed out of the deal after discovering some inconsistencies on the title deeds of the $8 million facility which was opened in December 2009 outside Arusha along Moshi road.

Mr Ndika, who also operates some investments in Arusha, in a Commercial Case No. 9 of 2012 he filed on January 5, 2012, prayed for a refund of his $ 1.7m and interest because of failure by the defendant to hand over to him the hotel.

Source: The Citizen Tanzania:

Dar urged to fight cybercrime

TECHNOLOGICAL advancements the world over have rendered it inevitable for countries to conduct assessments of their capacities in addressing cybercrime within their borders, experts say.

Speaking at the cybercrime need assessment programme held in Dar es Salaam on Monday, an expert from the United National Office on drugs and crime (UNODC), Division for Treaty Affairs, Ms Anika Holterhofi, said the assessments are a must if the countries have to survive the technological progression.

The programme which is prepared by the Ministry of Communication, science and technology in collaboration with the Commonwealth and UNODC will be conducted for seven days.

The assessment exercise will be conducted for four days and the experts will meet with seven groups of different professionals and specialties comprising 80 individuals among which 10 are judges, permanent secretaries and leaders of the national legal sector and 70 are professional representatives.

Ms Holterhofi said the main aim of the assessment was to identify areas which need more efforts to curb cybercrime and not to tell the country what it has not done to combat the crime.

“This assessment is very vital. It is what we do with countries in order to find out both what is actually present and to see where the country really wants to go,” she said.

The expert further added that the assessment is not to measure and tell the country what it has not been doing to combat the crime but to improve what has already been established.

The ministry’s Deputy Permanent Secretary, Dr John Mngodo, said that the experts will help us on ways to improve fighting cyber crime. “They will asses and advise us on what our requirements are in order to effectively deal with cybercrime within the country and eventually help the country to accomplish its mission to become cybercrime free,” said Dr Mngodo.

Dr Mngodo mentioned some of the areas which will be assessed as including policies and strategies, human and technological resource, legislation regulations, organization capacity, structure and training and international and regional cooperation in fighting cybercrime.

UNODC is a global leader in the fight against illicit drugs and international crime established in 1997 through a merger between the United Nations Drug Control Programme and the Centre for International Crime Prevention, UNODC operates in all regions of the world through an extensive network of field offices.

UNODC has been part of global and regional responses to cybercrime, producing a comprehensive study of cybercrime related threats in 2013.

UNODC assists member states to more effectively combat and prevent cybercrime, working with national and regional level partners, particularly to improve understanding of cybercrime and related responses and enhance staff knowledge and skills to identify and prevent the crime.

Source: Daily News Tanzania:

Man sues Museveni over army takeover of Naads programme

KAMPALA. 

A concerned citizen has gone to court to challenge President Museveni’s directive to have the army take over the management of the National Agricultural Advisory Services (Naads).

Mr Daniel Byaruhanga filed his complaint before the High Court in Kampala on August 21.
The Attorney General and Naads are the joint respondents in this matter.

According to court documents that this newspaper has seen, Mr Byaruhanga states that he is aggrieved with President Museveni’s directive of June 9 while officiating at the National Heros’ Day celebrations in Mityana District, in which the President said he would deployed soldiers in every constituency to monitor government agricultural programmes.

The President accused Naads coordinators of failing the programme that he said was aimed at improving people’s household incomes through agriculture.

Mr Museveni gave examples of successful stories of Luweero triangle projects that had been supervised by soldiers as the yardstick to restructure Naads under the supervision of soldiers.

Mr Byaruhanga further states that because of the President’s directive, the running contracts of the Naads coordinators are being terminated by their respective district service commissions.

He also says he is aggrieved with the creation of a new position in the Naads programme known as the “agricultural extension workers” which he says is not provided for in Naads programme as the same had not been approved by its board.

Mr Byaruhanga is seeking a court order to nullify the directive President Museveni, Cabinet resolution and that of the minister of Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries to incorporate the Uganda People’s Defence Forces (UPDF) in the activities of Naads.

He is seeking a “a declaration that the failure by the district service commissions to renew or terminate the running contracts of the agricultural advisory service providers, district and sub-county national agricultural advisory service coordinators on the advice of the minister of Agriculture, Animal Industry and Fisheries is unlawful.”

The petitioner through his lawyers of Tumwesigye, Baingana & Co Advocates, claims that already 300 UPDF soldiers have been trained, recruited and appointed and incorporated in the activities of Naads without the approval of the board or standing statutory instrument issued by the Agriculture ministry, making it unlawful.

Byaruhanga wants court to order the Chief of Defense Forces, Commander of Land Forces and the Joint Chief of Staff of UPDF to withdraw all soldiers from the activities of Naads.

He also wants court to issue an order directing all the district service commissioners to pay all the salaries and allowances that have accrued during what he called the illegal termination of contracts of Naads officials and also have them reinstated to their positions.

The directive

Directive: On June 9 President said he would deployed soldiers in every constituency to monitor government agricultural programmes. He accused Naads coordinators of failing the programme aimed at improving people’s household incomes through agriculture.

The President had in January made similar complaints about Naads officials in Mayuge District during celebrations to mark the Liberation Day.

Disappointment: He expressed his disappointment that whereas the government disburses Shs120 billion to districts for Naads activities every year, there is no change in the economic status of the rural beneficiaries.

Source: Daily Monitor (Uganda):

CERTIFICATE OF URGENCY

Sample A

THE UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA

IN THE HIGH COURT OF TANZANIA AT DAR ES SALAAM

CIVIL SUIT NO…………OF 20…….

XXX………..………………..PLAINTIFF
-V-
ZZZ…………..………DEFENDANT


CERTIFICATE OF URGENCY

We, …………………. Advocates, who have the conduct of this case on behalf of the Plaintiff/Applicant certify that the Chamber Summons filed herein on the ……… day of …….…………. 20….. is an urgent application requiring to be placed before the Honourable Judge ……………. at the earliest possible moment for the reason that the object of the said application might well be defeated and the suit rendered nugatory if the Defendant/Respondent attempt to or operate and thereafter alienate, or in any manner whatsoever deal with the sum of TSHS………… held in the Defendant’s accounts numbers ……………..and………………. held in Dar es Salaam.  

DATED at Dar es Salaam this………………day of…………………..20……..

…………………& Associates
Advocates for the Plaintiff/Applicant

DRAWN & FILED BY:-

………………………..
Advocates,
P. O. Box…………,    
Dar es Salaam


TO BE SERVED UPON
……………………..
P.O. Box…………..
Dar es Salaam.



Sample B

THE UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA

IN THE HIGH COURT OF TANZANIA AT DAR ES SALAAM

CIVIL SUIT NO…………OF 20…….

KKK………..………………..PLAINTIFF
-V-
FFF…………..………DEFENDANT


CERTIFICATE OF URGENCY

We, ………………., who have the conduct of this case on behalf of the Plaintiff/Applicant certify that the Chamber Summons filed herein on the  ……… day of …….…………. 20…… is a most urgent application requiring to be placed before the Honourable Judge…………………… at the earliest possible moment for the reason that the object of the said application will be defeated and the suit rendered nugatory if the Defendant/Respondent write, print and publish statements highly defamatory and which amount to serious libel of the Plaintiff/Applicant or in any manner continue to defame the Plaintiff and thereby exposing their character and reputation to ridicule, scandal, odium and contempt. If this happens, the applicant stand to suffer loss and damage.

DATED at Dar es Salaam this………………day of…………………..20……..

…………………& Associates
Advocates for the Plaintiff/Applicant

DRAWN & FILED BY:-

………………………..
Advocates,
P. O. Box…………,    
Dar es Salaam


TO BE SERVED UPON
……………………..
P.O. Box…………..
Dar es Salaam.

AFFIDAVIT OF GUARDIANSHIP

IN THE UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA
THE OATHS (JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS AND STATUTORY
DECLARATIONS) ACT 1966

AFFIDAVIT OF GUARDIANSHIP

I, .............................. adult, Christian  and resident of Dar es Salaam , Doth hereby solemnly takes oath                and states as follows:
1. That I am the deponent in this matter, thus conversant with what is about to be deposed hereto.
2. That I am the guardian of ................................., ............................. and ................................... 

3. That the said ............................ was born on........., ........  20....... at ......... and is my young sister .

4. That the said .......................... was born on the .........., ......... 20...... at ........... and is my young sister.

5. That the said ...................... was born on the .........., ............ 20......... at ............ and my aunt.

6. That my parents are unable to maintain my young sisters  as such I have been compelled to take of                  them. 
7. That the  parents of ...................are unable to meet the basic requirements thus, I have to  support him.
8. That I have been taking care of the said ........................., and .....................  since the year  20..... and          they are solely dependent on me.
9. That I have been taking care of the said ........................ since the year 20........... and he is solely                  dependent on me. 
10. That all what is stated above is true to the best of my own knowledge.



Dated at............... this....day of ......20......


SWORN at ............................by the said}       .................................
..........................................who is known }         DEPONENT
to me  Personally,                                     }
this.....day of.......................20................ }

BEFORE ME:

Name:................................
Address:............................
Signature:...........................
Designation: COMMISSIONER FOR OATHS

AFFIDAVIT OF PROOF OF NAMES AND SIGNATURES

Sample A (Christian)

THE UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA
THE OATHS (JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS AND STATUTORY DECLARATIONS) ACT, 1966

AFFIDAVIT OF PROOF OF NAMES AND SIGNATURES

1. I, ……………………. of P.O. Box ……………. Dar es Salaam, an adult Christian ordinarily resident of …………….., Dar es Salaam and working for gain in Tanzania, do hereby swear and state as follows:

2. I am the deponent herein and a citizen of Tanzania.

3. My birth name is …………………………………..

4. Therefore, the following names refer to the one and the same person:
a) …………………………………
b) ………………………………….
c)   ………………………………….
d) …………………………………

5. The above (under item 4) are the variations of the same name and should not be considered name changes.

6. The deponent depose further that signature with or without an initial(s) “….” or “…..” are the variations of the same signature for all intents and purposes and should not be considered signature changes.

7. That what is stated herein above from paragraph 1 to 6 is true to the best of my own knowledge.


SWORN by the said
…………………………………….            }
at Dar es Salaam, who is introduced               }
to me by ………....................…,                  }       ……………………..
the latter being known to me personally          }          DEPONENT
 This …… day of ……………..  20…….    }

Before me:
Names:      ___________________________________
Signature:    ___________________________________
Postal Address:   ___________________________________

Designation:     COMMISSIONER FOR OATHS

Sample B (Muslim)
THE UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA
THE OATHS (JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS AND STATUTORY DECLARATIONS) ACT, 1966

AFFIDAVIT OF PROOF OF NAMES

1. I, ………………………. of P.O. Box …………….. Mwanza, an adult Muslim ordinarily resident of ……………………, Mwanza and working for gain in Tanzania, do hereby affirm and state as follows:

2. I am the deponent herein and a citizen of Tanzania.

3. My birth name is …………………………………..

4. Therefore, the following names refer to the one and the same person:

a) …………………………………..
b) …………………………………..

5. The above (under item 4) are the variations of the same name and should not be considered name change for intents and purposes.

6. That what is stated herein above from paragraph 1 to 5 is true to the best of my own knowledge.


AFFIRMED by the said                                    }
…………………………………………           }
at Mwanza, who is known to me                          }       ………………………..
personally this .…..day of………….20……       }           DEPONENT

Before me:
Names:   ___________________________________
Signature: ___________________________________
Postal Address:  ___________________________________

Designation:     COMMISSIONER FOR OATHS

Illegal Fishing: Court’s 6-day notice to prosecutors

Dar es Salaam. 

The Kisutu Resident Magistrates’ Court gave prosecution six days to present evidence in a case of illegal fishing facing two Chinese nationals Hsu Chin Tai and Zhao Hanquing.

Resident Magistrate Warialwande Lema reached the decision yesterday after prosecution failed to comply with an order given by the court to present all statements from witnesses which are necessary for the proceedings.

The duo, who are Captain and Agent of the foreign Vessel Twariq 2, are accused of illegal fishing in the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ) of Tanzania.

They are charged with three counts of unlawful fishing activities in the EEZ, water pollution and degradation of marine environment.

The Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) has already filed information regarding the case at the High Court as required by the law.

After filling such information the prosecution is required to present before the lower court statements of the witnesses for the committal proceedings.

It was alleged that, between January 10 and March 8, 2009, jointly and together, the duo carried out fishing activities in the EEZ of Tanzania without licence.

Within the same period, according to the prosecution, both accused persons polluted the waters and degraded the marine environment of the Tanzania’s EEZ by throwing offal and other fish wastes in the waters.

It is alleged further that between March 8 and 11, 2009 at various places in Mombasa Kenya and Dar es Salaam Port in Temeke District, knowing that Tai carried out fishing activities in EEZ of Tanzania without license, Hanquing assisted him in order to enable him escape prosecution and punishment.

The case was adjourned to August 26 this year. 

Source: The Citizen Tanzania

Dar: Judge orders missing suspect brought to court

The Kisutu Resident Magistrate’s Court has ordered the former CCM official to be brought before court to testify in the forgery and theft case of over 200m/- from the Central Bank’s External Payment Arrears account (EPA) after he went missing presumably sick in hospital.

Issuing the order at the start of the week, Chairman of the panel of three magistrates presiding over the case, Senior Resident Magistrate John Utamwa, said the former CCM official, Rajabu Maranda, who is one of the accused in the case, must testify.

The other two magistrates on the panel are Principal Resident Magistrates Ignas Kitusi and Eva Nkya who were absent during the issuance of the order. 

The prosecution had earlier called on the court to move the hearing to the Muhimbili National Hospital (MNH) where the defendant, Rajabu Maranda was supposedly admitted but before the court could do so, the defense again claimed  that the accused had been discharged and would appear in court.

However, when the hearing came to court on Monday of this week, the defense again claimed that Maranda had been re-admitted but failed to provide any supporting documents.

The defense also could not provide any details as to the whereabouts of another accused in the case Imani Mwakosya, former Head of the Bilateral and Commercial Department of the Bank of Tanzania (BoT) who is the third accused in the case. 

However, his surety who signed the bail for him, Joseph Mwakosya, also claimed that the accused is sick and admitted to the same hospital MNH.

Apart from Mwakosya and Maranda, also charged in the case are the former BoT Deputy Director of Debt Department, Ester Komu and Secretaries to the bank, Bosco Kimela and Farijala Hussein.

It is alleged that the accused committed the offence between September 8, 2003 and August 18, 2008. 

They are accused of stealing Sh207, 284,391/44 from the BoT EPA account after presenting forged documents to show that Rashaz Company was assigned to collect the debt on behalf of an Indian company called General Marketing.

SOURCE: THE GUARDIAN

Brazil president signs law expanding rights of domestic workers

[JURIST] Brazilian President Dilma Rousseff on Friday signed into law a measure providing basic protections to Brazilian domestic workers. The law limits domestic workers' work weeks to 44 hours, and the work day to eight hours. The law also creates a minimum wage and requires employers to register their domestic workers and provide lunch breaks, social security and severance pay.

Domestic workers, especially those working abroad, tend to have far fewer protections than other classes of workers. In April Amnesty International reported on the human rights abuses faced by migrant domestic workers in Qatar. In November Human Rights Watch issued a letter to the Labor Minister of Morocco, Abdeslam Seddiki, imploring the Moroccan government to revise a draft law before the Moroccan parliament regarding legal protections for domestic workers to comply with international standards. In 2011, International Labor Organization (ILO) passed the Domestic Workers Convention (No. 189), a measure extending basic labor rights to workers in signatory countries, including days off each week, set hours and a minimum wage. The law came into effect in September of 2013 for signatory countries.

Uganda: Court quashes anti-gays law

KAMPALA. 

The Constitutional Court yesterday nullified the Anti-Homosexuality Act 2014 for having been passed by Parliament without the required quorum of at least one third of all legislators.

In a unanimous ruling, the panel of five justices blamed the Speaker of Parliament Rebecca Kadaga for acting illegally by abdicating her constitutional responsibility of ascertaining whether there was quorum in the House before the Bill was passed into law.

The court panel was led by acting deputy Chief Justice Steven Kavuma. The other members were Justices Augustine Nshimye, Eldad Mwangusya, Solomy Balungi Bossa and Rubby Aweri Opio.

The judges held that at least three people, including Prime Minister Amama Mbabazi, alerted Ms Kadaga about the lack of quorum in the House at the time of passing the Bill but she ignored their warning and went ahead to preside over the proceedings to pass the law on December 20, last year.

To that effect, the justices observed that such an illegality by the Speaker of Parliament once brought to the attention of the court, cannot be overlooked.

“Rule 23 of Parliamentary Rules of Procedure requires the Speaker of Parliament even without being prompted by someone else, to ensure that quorum exists. We note that the Speaker was prompted three times that there was no quorum in the House, including the Prime minister, but ignored the same,” the judges ruled.

“We uphold that the act of the 9th Parliament in enacting the Anti-Homosexuality Bill into law without quorum is inconsistent with articles 88, 94 of the Constitution and Rule 23 of the Parliamentary Rules of Procedure. We come to a conclusion that she (Ms Kadaga) acted illegally and failure to obey the law makes the Act null and void,” the judges further stated.

The court also ordered the Attorney General, who represented the government as the respondent in this matter, to pay 50 per cent of the legal costs the pro-gay activists used in their petition. 
Shortly after the ruling, pro-gay activists jumped in joy and jubilated over the victory.

City advocate John Francis Onyango, one of the lawyers who represented the pro-gay activists, described the ruling as a landmark decision and said it was victory for the rule of law.

“This is a victory for the rule of law and it’s an indictment on Parliament on the way it conducts its proceedings. The Speaker of Parliament is expected to know not only the Rules of Procedure in Parliament but also the legal requirements,” said Mr Onyango

“She cannot impose certain rules and leave out others as she wants. It is not about what she wants but what the law wants.”

The Attorney General, represented by State Attorney Patricia Muteesi, had argued that the petitioners did not present evidence to prove that there was no quorum in the House on December 20, 2013, when the Bill was passed.

Ms Muteesi argued that they should have presented the register for MPs who attended the proceedings that day or a video footage to show that indeed the quorum was less than two-thirds majority. 

However, the ruling does not mean that the court nullified the content or substance of the law. The court nullified the law purely on procedural grounds because it was passed without a quorum as required by the rules.

The Bill can be easily returned to Parliament and passed again, this time with the required quorum of at least 125 out of the 365 MPs in the House. 

This petition involved a group of pro-gay activists who sued the government challenging the passing of the Anti-Homosexuality Bill into law for lack of quorum.

They include; Prof Joe Oloka-Onyango, MP Fox Odoi-Oywelowo, journalist Andrew Mwenda, Prof Morris Latigo, Dr Paul Nsubuga Ssemugoma, Jacqueline Kasha Nabagesera, Julian Pepe Onziema, and Frank Mugisha, in March this year.

The other petitioners include the indigenous civil society organisations; Human Rights Awareness and Promotion Forum and the Centre for Health, Human Rights and Development.

President Museveni on February 24 publically assented to the Anti-Homosexuality Bill in a ceremony that was broadcast live on television. 

According to the Anti-Homosexuality Act 2014, a person who purports to contract a marriage with another person of the same sex, commits the offence of homosexuality and is liable, on conviction, to imprisonment for life.

The passing of the anti-gay law attracted a lot of criticism from Western countries, with some cutting aid to Uganda on grounds that criminalising same sex relationships promotes stigma and discrimination against homosexuals. It equally drew widespread support among the local population which is opposed to homosexuality.

Saturday Monitor: Uganda:

JURIST - Paper Chase

Blog Archive

Followers