THE CYBER CRIMES ACT, 2015 - TANZANIA

file:///C:/Documents%20and%20Settings/MAX.UAGES-DDAA743D6/My%20Documents/Downloads/CYBERCRIMES%20ACT%202015.pdf

Tangazo la Sheria kufutwa kwa Matokea Uchaguzi Mkuu Zanzibar

Saying “KAFFIR” is a punishable offence in South Africa

Extracts from legal and court papers below:

REPORTABLE

IN THE HIGH COURT OF SOUTH AFRICA

(EASTERN CAPE, GRAHAMSTOWN)

CASE NO: CA 165/2008
In the matter between
MIETA M RYAN Appellant

VS
RODWIN PETRUS Respondent
JUDGMENT
PICKERING J:
I turn then to consider the words uttered by defendant. It will be convenient to commence with the use of the highly offensive word “kaffir”.
As far back as 1976 James JP in Ciliza v Minister of Police and Another 1976 (4) SA 243 (N), after having referred to various dictionary definitions of the word, stated at 247H:
“It follows that in my opinion one of the recognised meanings which the word ‘Kaffir’ now bears in South Africa is that such a person is uncivilised, uncouth and coarse and that if one calls a person a ‘Kaffir’ this will in certain circumstances constitute an iniuria.”
In that matter a white policeman had used the word in addressing the plaintiff, who was a black man. Plaintiff was awarded the sum of R150,00 as damages.
In Mbatha v Van Staden 1982 (2) SA 260 (N) the plaintiff, a black man, sued the defendant, a white man, for iniuria after the defendant had repeatedly called him a “kaffir” and assaulted him. At 262 H – 263A Didcott J stated as follows:
“The tirade’s worst feature was the use of the epithet ‘kaffer’. Such alone can amount today to an actionable wrong, according to the decision of the Full Bench here in Ciliza v Minister of Police and Another 1976 (4) SA 243 (N). Everything depends, of course, on the context in which the word is uttered. Settings which make it innocuous can no doubt be imagined. Ordinarily, however, that is not the case when, in South Africa nowadays, a Black man or woman is called a ‘kaffer’ by somebody of another race. Then, as a rule, the term is a derogatory and contemptuous one. With much the same ring as the word ‘nigger’ in the United States, it disparages the Black race and the person concerned as a member of that race. It is deeply offensive to blacks. Just about everyone knows that by now. The intention to offend can therefore be taken for granted, on most occasions at any rate.”
The plaintiff was awarded the sum of R2 000,00 as damages.

Citizenship Law in Africa A Comparative Study

Citizenship Law in Africa

A Comparative Study

By Bronwen Manby

http://www2.ohchr.org/english/issues/women/docs/OtherEntities/OSJI%20CitizenshipAfricaStudy.pdf

http://www2.ohchr.org/english/issues/women/docs/OtherEntities/OSJI%20CitizenshipAfricaStudy.pdf

NUMERICAL INDEX TO PRINCIPAL LEGISLATION of TANZANIA RV.2002

Chapter 1
The Interpretation of Laws Act
Chapter 2
Katiba Ya Jamhuri Ya Muungano Wa Tanzania, Ya Mwaka
Chapter 3
The Basic Rights and Duties Enforcement Act
Chapter 4
The Laws Revision Act
Chapter 5
The Government Proceedings Act
Chapter 6
The Evidence Act
Chapter 7
The Judgements Extension Act
Chapter 8
The Reciprocal Enforcement of Foreign Judgements Act
Chapter 9
The Presidential Affairs Act
Chapter 10
The National Emblems Act
Chapter 11
The Magistrates' Courts Act
Chapter 12
The Notaries Public and Commissioners for Oaths Act
Chapter 13
The Children and Young Persons Act
Chapter 14
The Hire Purchase Act
Chapter 15
The Arbitration Act

TANZANIA PENAL CODE CHAPTER 16 OF THE LAWS

TANZANIA

PENAL CODE

 CHAPTER 16 OF THE LAWS (REVISED)

 (PRINCIPAL LEGISLATION)

[Issued Under Cap. 1, s. 18]

1981

PRINTED AND PUBLISHED BY THE GOVERNMENT

http://www.un.org/depts/los/LEGISLATIONANDTREATIES/PDFFILES/TZA_penal_code.pdf

United Republic of Tanzania (25 texts)

Constitution / Basic Law (Date of current version)

• The Constitution of the United Republic of Tanzania of 1977 (2005)
• The Constitution of Zanzibar (2002)
• Union of Tanganyika and Zanzibar Act, 1964 (1964)

Main IP Laws: enacted by the Legislature (Date of current version)

• The Zanzibar Industrial Property Act No. 4 of 2008 (2008)
• The Zanzibar Copyright Act, 2003 (2003)
• The Protection of New Plant Varieties (Plant Breeders' Rights) Act, 2002 (2002)
• The Traditional and Alternative Medicine Act No. 23 of 2002 (2002)
• Copyright and Neighbouring Rights Act, 1999 (1999)
• The Patents (Registration) Act (1995)
• The Trade and Service Marks Act, 1986 (1986)
• Merchandise Marks Act, 1963 (No. 20 of 1963) (1963)

IP-related Laws: enacted by the Legislature (Date of current version)

• Business Activities Registration Act, 2007 (2007)
• The Universities Act, 2005 (2005)
• The Income Tax Act 2004 (2004)
• The Zanzibar Flag Act No. 12 of 2004 (2004)
• The Fair Competition Act (2003)
• The Companies Act, 2002 (2002)
• The Broadcasting Services Act, 1993 (1993)
• Business Names (Registration) Act (1991)
• National Flag and Coat of Arms Act, 1971 (1971)
• The Arbitration Act (1971)
• The Civil Procedure Code, 1966 (1966)

Source: http://www.wipo.int/wipolex/en/profile.jsp?code=tz

THE DEATH PENALTY IN TANZANIA: LAW AND PRACTICE

LEONARD P. SHAIDI
∗
I. INTRODUCTION 
The death penalty where it is practised has been reserved for the most serious crimes.  The list of capital offences has been shrinking in different societies with the passage of time, although the list is not identical 
even within African countries.  

Similarly, the list of abolitionist states has grown steadily from a handful of abolitionist states in 1940s to approximately half the countries of the world de facto or de jure rejecting the death penalty.  Even the countries which retain the death penalty are under increasing international pressure to abolish it.  The immediate focus is on narrowing as much as possible, offences which carry the death penalty, particularly to limit it to murder only.  In inter-state relations sometimes extradition may be refused where a fugitive may be exposed to the application of the death penalty.  The death penalty is therefore, regarded as a punishment of the past, not the future.   

This penalty has received ideological justification from the main religions, in our case Christianity and Islam.  Many believers would not wish to question anything which they consider to have been sanctioned by their religion as taught by their religious leaders.  

In penological terms, capital punishment is a reflection of retributive justice, embodying the ancient maxim of ‘an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth.’ It is based on vengeance channelling public outrage into a legalized form of punishment.  It is argued by its proponents that, in its absence, outraged people may be forced to seek vengeance through mob justice or individualized forms of revenge.   These are, however, mere impressions not supported by any data.  

II. LAW AND PRACTICE 
In Tanzania there are two offences which carry the death penalty:  murder and treason. 

Under section 197 of the Penal Code (Chapter 16), ‘any person convicted of murder shall be sentenced to death.’  This is a mandatory requirement which leaves the court with no option but to pass the death sentence upon conviction of a person.  However, the same section in its proviso exempts pregnant women.  

Instead they are to be sentenced to imprisonment for life if convicted of murder.  Treason, under sections 39 and 40 also carries the death penalty, but ‘misprision of treason’ (section 41) is punishable with life imprisonment.  
Section 26 of the Penal Code also exempts persons under eighteen years of age from the death penalty.  

Such juveniles are to be detained ‘during the President’s pleasure…in such place and under such conditions as the Minister for Legal Affairs may direct.’ 
The Tanzania High Court and Court of Appeal have construed capital punishment statutes strictly.  In the case of treason, for example no person has been sentenced to die under the provisions which carry the death 
                                                
∗
 Professor at the Faculty of Law, University of Dar Es Salaam 2
penalty since the country became independent in 1961.   Under the offence of treason, the phrase used in the sentence provision is ‘shall be liable on conviction to suffer death.’  The courts have interpreted this as 
merely setting the upper limit, but not mandatory.  As for murder, the phrase used is ‘shall be sentenced to death’, and this is taken as mandatory. 

However in the case of murder, most prosecutions for this offence 
end up with the verdict of manslaughter, which does not carry the death penalty.  Murder convictions are, therefore, recorded in cases where there is overwhelming evidence to establish the offence, and the law 
provides that where any person is sentenced to death, the sentence shall direct that he shall suffer death by hanging.  

On the question of age, the law provides that the death penalty should not be pronounced against a person under 18 years of age. There are conflicting decisions as to whether this age limit refers to the time of commission of the offence or during sentencing.  In the case of  R.v. Lubasha Maderenya and Tegai Lebasha
1
, the High Court (Lugakingira, J.) did not impose a death penalty on one of the accused because he 
was below 18 years at the time of commission of the murder.  During the hearing of the Appeal, the Court 
of Appeal reversed this decision. 
2
  
III. CONSTITUTIONAL CONCERNS 

Legitimizing Dispossession: The Tanzanian High Court's Decision on the Eviction of Maasai Pastoralists from Mkomazi Game Reserve

Author: 

TengaW. Ringo

CSQ Issue: 

22.4 (Winter 1998) Uprooted: Dispossession in Africa

Ownership and security of land is central to the cultural survival of ethnic minorities in countries such as Tanzania. For the past decade, the struggle for the land rights of cultural minorities in Tanzania has, amongst many fronts, focused on obtaining legal rights from courts of law. The central aim of these efforts is to obtain "a community-based test case to establish the deemed Right of Occupancy," that is the legal embodiment of the common title to land for a "native community," as defined by Tanzania Land Law. The existing wisdom holds that once a precedent is established on the nature of the common title over, say rangelands, it will be much easier for communities, at least legally, to stop the continual encroachment on their extensive rangelands under the pretext that such land is terra nullius (no one's lands) or is underutilized.

True enough, precedents have been established during the years in a variety of Court cases on land, but whether these have enhanced the struggles of these communities remains doubtful.

Established Precedents over Customary Title to Land

The Tanzanian courts today recognize the equal status of the Deemed Right of Occupancy, or Customary Title vis-à-vis the Granted Right of Occupancy As a consequence of this recognition, the Customary Title to land may not be extinguished without following the provisions of the law that allow the state to acquire landed private property, (e.g. the Land Acquisition Act, 1967). Statutes that extinguish Customary Titles without adhering to constitutional protections are therefore null and void; also the mere administrative extinction of customary titles by using administrative mechanisms (e.g. declaration of planning areas), cannot effectively extinguish such titles in law.

Furthermore, the Tanzanian Courts recognize the native community's title to the commons (e.g. pasture land), upon proof of the existence of customary law within that community that recognizes ownership of the commons. Following this, the Courts today appear to have refused to recognize statutory corporate bodies, such as Village Councils, as customary holders of the collective Deemed Right of Occupancy over the commons. Where customary holders need to lodge a matter in Court relating to the particular commons, either a representative suit must be filed listing all the possible beneficiaries or all the beneficiaries must appear as plaintiffs. In matters related to damages, each plaintiff must prove the extent of damage. Time limitation is extremely important as the claim would be time barred in three years from the time the cause of action arose. And on questions regarding the social and cultural profile of communities, Courts are willing to receive experts' evidence from anthropologists, ethnologists, sociologists etc., provided it includes detailed ancestry, genealogies, names of landscapes, geographical marks, ancient paths and roads, common resources and their maintenance, cultural systems and artifacts, grave sites, sacred places, traditional property systems and resources, economic activities, nomadic cycles, etc.

Tanzania: Court of Appeal Decisions

Tanzania: Court of Appeal

Database last updated: 16 August 2012 Most recent decision: 22 December 2011 Number of decisions: 260 Decisions beginning with ... 0-9 A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z Decisions for the years ... 1983 1991 1994 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2011 This database contains decisions of the Tanzanian Court of Appeal

Administrative Tribunals In Tanzania

(CTL CLASS – 11^TH and 12^th MAY 2011)

  © JABA SHADRACK, Department of Public Law, School of Law (Formerly, Faculty of law) at the University of Dar es Salaam, Tanzania

Lecture outline:

1. Introduction to Adjudicative/Judicial Powers in Tanzania
2. Definition of Administrative Tribunals
3. Other names for/of Administrative Tribunals
4. Types and Examples of Administrative Tribunals in Tanzania
5. Legal basis of Administrative Tribunals in Tanzania
6. Ordinary Courts v/s Administrative Tribunals
7. Inherent features of Administrative Tribunals
8. Why Administrative Tribunals? (Advantages)
9. Criticism of Administrative Tribunals (Disadvantages)

Introduction to Judicial Powers in Tanzania

Traditionally, the duty of determining disputes between individuals in the society is viewed as an exclusive domain of the ordinary courts of law. The conception of a court as a central adjudicative body found acceptance in most of the classical scholars' writings such as Montesquieu (separation of powers) and contemporary jurists such as Dicey (rule of law). TheConstitution of Tanzania, 1977 (RE: 2005) under Article 4(1)(2) vests judicial powers in the Judiciary of the United Republic and the Judiciary of the Revolutionary government of Zanzibar. In the same vein, The Constitution of Zanzibar, 1984 (RE: 2006) under Article 5A(2) confers judicial authority to the Courts of law. Article 107A(1) of the Constitution of Tanzania(supra) cements and reiterate the above position by providing that;

The Judiciary shall be the authority with final decision in dispensation of justice in the United Republic of Tanzania.

Though the Constitution of Tanzania (supra) is very clear on which organ should exercise judicial powers, in reality many judicial functions have come to be performed by the executive, e.g. imposition of fines, levy of penalty, confiscation of goods, cancellation of licences and etc. 

Summary:

Under the Constitution of Tanzania and Zanzibar respectively, the Courts of law have exclusive jurisdiction in the adjudicative system of the country. 

  Definition of Administrative Tribunals

There is no universally accepted definition of the term Administrative Tribunals or simply 'tribunal' as per professor Jain. However, jurists, academicians, and administrators (politicians) have made several attempts to explain the same. Now, let us look at some of the definitions;

• Thakker (Takwani, 1998)
  

Are bodies established to decide various quasi-judicial issues in place of ordinary courts.

• Supreme Court of India, 1954.

Are adjudicative bodies constituted, manned and operated by the executive. 

• L.B. Curzon, Dictionary of Law, 6^th Ed., 2002 (Pearson/Longman).

Are bodies outside the hierarchy of the courts with administrative or judicial functions.

An Introduction to Public Law Of Tanzania

© JABA SHADRACK, Department of Public Law, School of Law (Formerly, Faculty of law) at the University of Dar es Salaam.  (CTL CLASS – OCTOBER 27, 2011)

  

Lecture outline:

1.1 Meaning of law

1.2. Role and functions of law

1.3. Sources of law in Tanzania

1.4. Classification of law

1.5 References

1.1 MEANING OF LAW

To religious people, the term law is closely associated with God's commands or directives or rules contained in Holy Books, thus 'law of nature' (i.e. law proclaimed my a supernatural beings, e.g. ancestors, spirits, goddess and etc). But, to social scientists, lawyers, politicians and economists, the term 'law' relates with the command of the sovereign (state) and its various institutions, thus 'law of science' (i.e. peoples' will or agreed system and standards of conduct). However, the area of concern in this brief outline is the 'law of science'.

The following are some attempts to define the term 'law':-

(a) Oxford Dictionary of law, 7th Ed., 2009 (p. 316).

Define the term 'law' as the enforceable body of rules that govern the society.

(b) Shivji, 2004, et. al., p. 3.

Is an obligatory rules of conduct imposed or recognised and enforced by the state.

(c) Salwan and Narang (2008) Academic's legal dictionary. 18th Ed., p. 201.