Constitutional Cases

You need to login to view the following content . Please Login. Not a Member? Join Us

Articles 12–29 – when constitutional question arises in subordinate court magistrate must refer to High Court under Basic Rights and Duties Enforcement Act; jurisdiction – subordinate court lacks competence to decide such constitutional issues except where parties agree or question is frivolous/vexatious; procedural election – aggrieved person must invoke Act (petition) themselves; nullity – proceedings and subsequent appellate decisions founded on failure to refer are null and void.

AMANEDMENT OF THE CONSTITUTION REQUIRING CONTESTANTS FOR POSITIONS OF PRESIDENT AND MEMEBER OF PARLIAMNT TO BE MEMBERS OF POLITICAL PARTIES, WHETHER DISCRIMINATITORY, WHETHER CONSTITUTIONAL

AMENDMENT OF THE CONSTITUTION, AMENDMENT RESTRICTING CONTENTASTS FOR POSITIONS OF PRESIDENT AND MEMBER OF PARLIAMENT TOMEMBERS OF POLIICAL PARTIES ONLY, WHETHER THE AMENDMENTS MEET THE PROPORTIONALIT

ARTICLE 126 PETITION FOR A DECLARATORY ODER TO SUMMON A SPECIAL CONSTITUTIONAL COURT, WHETHER MEMBERS OF A REGISTERED POLITICAL PART HAVE LEGAL PERSONALITY TO SEEK THE ORDER

ARTICLES OF THE UNION CONSTITUTION, WHETHER UNALTERABLE

ARTICLES OF THE UNION, WHETHER UNALTERABLE

ARTICLES OF THE UNION, WHETHER VALIDITY EXPIRED UPON PROMULGATION OF THE UNION CONSTITUTION

ARTICLES OFTHE UNION, WHETHER VALIDITYEXPIRED UPON PROMULGATION OF THE UNION CONSTITUTION

AVOIDANCE OF ELECTION, EXPLOITING TRIBAL DIFFERENCES AS A GROUND FOR AVOIDING ELECTION, WHETHER SUCH EXPLOITATION MUST AFFECT RESULT OF ELECTION SECTION 180(2)(a) of the election Act

BASIC RIGHTS QUARANTEED PROTECTION BY THE CONSTITUTION

CONSTITUTIONAL PETITION

CASE FILED IN A COURT OF RESIDENT MAGISTRATE BUT ASSIGNED TO AND PRESIDED OVER BY A DISTRICT MAGISTRATE, WHETHER THE COURT IS DULY CONSTITUTED

COMPAINGS FOR ELECTION, LEGALITY OF ELECTION COMPAIGN, ELECTION COMPAIGN AT AFUNCTION ORGANIZED BY A RELIGIOUS BODY OR INSTITUTION, WHETHER THE COMPAIGN IS LAWFUL

CONSTITUTION AMENDEMENT REQUIRING CONTESTATIONS FOR POSITIONS OF PRESIDENT AND MEMBER OF PARLIAMENT TO BE MEMBER S OF POLITAL PARTIES-AMNDEMENTS CONT AMENDEMNTS CONTRAVENE INTERNATIONAL INTRUMENTS OT

CONSTITUTION AMENDMENT REQUIRING CONTENSTANTS FOR POSITIONS OF PRESIDENT AND MEMBER OF PARLIAMENT TO BE MEMBERS PARLIAMENT PARTIES, WHETHER THE AMENDMENTS MEET THE PROPORTNALITY TEST

CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDEMENT, ENACTMENT OF THE 11 AMENDEMNET TO THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA, WHETHER MADE UNILATERALLY

CONSTITUTIONALITY OF SECTION 148(5) OF THE CRIMINAL PROCEDURE ACT WHICH PROVIDES THAT NO BAIL SHALL BE GRANTED TO A PERSON CHARGED WITH THE OFFENCE OF MURDER, WHETHER A COURT OF RESIDENT MAGISTRATE H

CONTEXT OF THE CONSTITUTION IS ESSENTIAL IN INTERPRETING CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS

CORRUPT PRACTICES, ELECTRORAL CORRUPT PRACTICES, INCUMBENT CANDIDATE DISCLOSING EXISTENCE OF A FUND FOR CONSTRUCTION OF WELLS HE ESTBALISHED WELL BEFORE THE ELECTION COMPAIGN PERIOD

COURT OF APPEAL AND THE LEGISLATIVE POWERS OF PARLIAMENT, CONSTITUTION SEBSEQUENTLY ADDS THERETO THE POWERS OF REVISION, WHETHER THE ADDITION IS NOT ULTR VIRES, SECTION 4(2) AND (3) OF THE APPELLATE

DAMAGES FOR UNLAWFUL TERMINATION OF EMPLOYMENT

DRCUTITY FOR COSTS, WHETHER FAILURE TO EXPLICITILY ITEMIZE SECURITY FOR COSTS IN EXCHEQUER RECEIPT RENDERS AN ELECTION PETITION INCOMPETENT

DURATION OF ELECTION COMPAIGN PERIOD

– Elections – Election petitions – Security for costs – Parliamentary lawmaking powers – Equality before the law – Right of access to courts – Constitutionality of mandatory deposit as security for costs – Judicial discretion – Discrimination against indigent litigants

ELECTION PETITION, LIMITATION OF TIME WITHIN WHICH HIGH COURT SOULD HEAR AND DETERMINE ELECTION PETITION, STATUTE PRESCRIBING A DEFINITE PERIOD FOR HEARING AND DETERMINATION OF ELECTION PETITIONS

FREE AND FAIR ELLECTIONS, CHAOS DURING ELECTIONS, WHETHER ELECTIONS CAN BE SAID TO BE FREE AND FAIR

Interpretation of constitutional provisions – Context of the constitution is essential in interpreting constitutional provisions Constitutional Law – Basic Rights – Enforcement of basic rights – Whether it is appropriate to seek enforcement of every basic right infringed by petitioning the High Court. The two petitioners were widows

IMMUNITY OF MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT FROM PROSECUTION

IMPUGNED LEGISLATION, SAVING OF SUCH LEGISLATION, MUST MEET THE TEST OF PROPORTALITY

INTERPRETATION OF CONSTITUTION, ORDINARY PRESCRIPTIONS NOT APPROPRIATE

INTERPRETATION OF CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS

Locus standi – Legal action against infringement of basic rights under the Constitution – Whether complainants who a not natural persons may have locus standi to take legal action – Article 30(3) of the Constitution and section 4 of the Basic Rights and Duties Enforcement Act Civil Practice and Procedure – Cause of action — Failure to disclose a cause of action – Petition not disclosing a cause of action

LEGALITY OF PUBLIC AND PRIVATE COMPAIGNS, COMPAIGNS CONDUCTED OUTSIDE THE SCHEDULED PROGRAMME, WHETHER THE COMPAIGNS ARE LAWFUL

LEGISLATIVE POWERS OF PARLIAMENT, LIMITATION

MEMBERSHIP OF PARLIAMENT, TENURE OF OFFICE OF MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT AND THE COMPAIGN PERIOD, WHETHER MEMBERS AND THE SPEAKER OF THE NATIONAL ASSEMBLY STILL HOLD THEIR RESPECTIVE OFFICES DURING THE

NOTICE, OUSTER OF STATUTORY PROVISIONS BY CASE LAW, PROCEDURE OF RAISING CONSTITUTIONAL QUESTIONS, VIENNA CONVENTION

NULLIFICATION OF, RECIST STATEMENTS, WHETHER SUFFICIENT TO NULLIFY ELECTIONS SECTION 108(2)(a) OF ELECTIONS ACT

PETITION FOR A DECLARATORY ORDER TO SUMMON A SPECIAL CONSTITUTIONAL COURT, WHETHER MEMBERS OF A REGISTRRED POLITICAL PARTY HAVE LEGAL PERSONALITY TO SEEK THE ORDER

PLAINTIFF EXPELLED FROM HER POLITICAL PARTY WITHOUT A HEARING OR NOTICE, BREACH OF NATURAL JUSTICE

– Provisions oflaw relating to human rights -Need to be construed liberally, with elasticity and not restrictively or rigidly — Compliance with legal requirements necessary. Civil Practice and Procedure — Preliminary objection – Petition incompetent because not accompanied by originating summons – The complaints in the petition are not proper matter for suit under the Basic Rights and Duties Enforcement Act

POWERS OF THE PRESIDENT TO REMOVE A PERSON FROM OFFICE

POWERS PRIVILEGES AND IMMUNITIES OF PARLIAMENT, WHETHER COURT MAY QUESTION AN ACTION TAKEN BY THE NATIONAL ASSEMBLY, ARTICLE 100(1_ OF THE CONSTITUTION AND SECTION12 OF THE PARLIAMENTARY IMMUNITIES

PRINCIPLES OF CONSTITUTIONAL INTERPREATION

RIGHT TO APPEAL AS CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT

REVISION OF DECISIONS ORIGINATING FROM AND DETERMINED IN KADHIS COURTS

RIGHT TO ATTEND PARLIAMENTARY SESSIONS

Subordinate courts must refer Article 12–29 constitutional issues to the High Court; failure renders proceedings void. Constitutional jurisdiction — Article 30(3) — BRADEA s9(1) — subordinate courts’ duty to refer questions on Articles 12–29 to High Court — incidental use of constitutional provisions v. exercise of original constitutional jurisdiction — nullity for lack of jurisdiction — revisional powers under Magistrates’ Courts Act s44(1)(b)

SUIT AGAINST GOVERMEN

SEPARATION OF POWERS, ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE,FINAL AUTHORITY IN THE ADMINISTRATION OF JUSTICE, HIGH COURT FINDS AN ACTION OR ENACTMENT INVALID OR UNCONSTITUTIONAL

SEPARATION OF POWERS, COURT ACTION TO ENQUIRE INTO A DECISION TAKEN BY THE NATIONAL ASSEMBLY IN THE COURSE AND AS PART OF PARLIAMENTARY PROCEEDINGS, WHETHER THE ACTION CONTRAVENES THE DOCTRINE

STATUTE PRESCRIBING A TWO YEAR PERIOD, WHETHER THE PRESCRIBED PERIOD TAKES ACCOUNT OF THE TIME TAKEN UP BY APPEALS FROM PRELIMINARY RULING AND ORDERS

TERMINATED OFFICERS CLAIMING TO BE PAID STATUTORY SALARIES UP TO DATE OF COMPULSORY RETIREMENT, WHETHER THE CLAIM IS AWARDABLE

TIME PRESCRIBING FOR THE HEARING AND DETERMINATION OF ELECTION PETITIONS, EXTENSION OF THE PRESCRIBED TIME BY THE MINISTER

UNION OF TANGANYIKA AND ZANZIBAR TO FORM THE UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA, WHETHER THE CONSTITUENT PARTS OF THE UNION RETAINED THEIR SOVEREGN STATUS

– validity of Act No. 34 of 1994 (11th Amendment) – restriction of presidential and parliamentary candidacy to party nominees – proportionality test – burden on State to justify limits on fundamental rights – role of international human rights instruments – remedial declaration and direction to legislature

WHETHER TAKRIMA PROVISION VIOLATE THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA

WHETHER THE COURT OF APPEAL IS PRECLUDED FROM DEALING WITH A CONSTITUTIONAL ISSUE NOT FIRST DECIDED BY THE HIGH COURT ARTICLE 30(3) AND (4) OF THE CONSTITUTION