AfricaPress-Tanzania: THE High Court has dismissed with costs the constitutional petition lodged by two associations propagating democracy and activism- Centre for Strategies Litigation Limited and Change Tanzania Limited- that opposed provisions under State laws that put to account Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs) operating in the country.
Justices Lameck Mlacha, Yose Mlyambina and Steven Magoiga ruled in favour of the Attorney General, Registrar of Companies and Registrar of NGOs, respondents, after holding that the petitioners failed to prove their claims beyond reasonable doubts as required for constitutional cases.
“Despite the instant petition preferred as a public litigation, this is one of the most frivolous and vexations petitions that cannot escape an order without costs. In the fine this petition is dismissed with costs. Order accordingly,” the judges declared.
In the petition, the case, Centre for Strategies Litigation Limited and Change Tanzania Limited, the two petitioners, were challenging the constitutionality of amendments of some provisions under the Companies Act, the Non-Governmental Organisation Act and the Societies Act.
The amendments to the relevant Act consisted of, among other things, provision of new interpretation of the words “Company” and “Organisation” in the relevant Act.
Such amendments also required all corporations registered under the Companies Act that had no commercial purpose to register under the relevant Act and if they failed to do so within two months, they would be deemed to have been canceled.
The appellants thus requested the court to declare as unconstitutional, some of the sections of the Acts, as emended by Act No 3, 2019, for allegedly contravening Articles 13 (1) (2) (6) (a) (b), 20 (1) and 29 (1) and (2) of the Constitution of the United Republic of Tanzania, 1977 as amended.
In their judgment, the judges had to determine whether the petitioners discharged their burden and standard of proof required in constitution petitions.
Having revisited the joint affidavit filed to support the petition, the judges found no such proof.
“The petitioners have utterly failed to discharge the legal duty of proving the impugned provisions are unconstitutional. On reading the affidavit, one cannot get details of the breach as required by law. It is evident that the petitioners have failed to meet the required standard of proof,” they ruled.
According to the judges, it was very unfortunate on the part of counsel for the petitioners that the principle that constitutional petitions should be proved beyond reasonable doubt was pronounced in 1995, now over 25 years, but deliberately missed such obvious requirement to have a successful petition.
They pointed out further that allegations alone, however serious they may be, could not be a basis for the court to declare a provision of law unconstitutional.
The judges noted that the petition was premised on fears, with petitioners coming to court with mere assertions without proving what happened.
Under the circumstances, the judges proceeded to dismiss the constitutional petition and condemned the petitioner organisation, who are alleged to have been owned by youthful defence Advocate Jebra Kambole and activists Maria Sarungi Tsehai, to pay costs.
It was alleged by counsel for the petitioners that the amendments done conflicts with the right to equality before the law, freedom of association and the right to enjoy basic human rights, as guaranteed under the Constitution, the mother law of the land.
Responding, however, State lawyers opposed the petition on various grounds, including that the petitioners failed to prove to the court their allegations on effects of the amendment of the Act to the extent required in constitutional cases and as such the impugned provisions are constitutional.
