East African Court of Justice, Arusha, 30th September, 2018: The First Instance Division dismissed Dr Mpozayo Christophe’s Case against the Government of Rwanda over his arrest, detention, prosecution conviction and sentencing for the offence of inciting insurrection amongst the population for being in possession of ammunition. The Applicant, who is a Rwandan Citizen and former Staff of the Community in the East African Legislative Assembly (EALA), was seeking Court orders to declare that the government infringed the fundamental Principles of the Community as well as Rwandan Laws.
In ruling Court held that it is not satisfied by the Applicant that Criminal Case No.RP0017/14/HC/KIG was conducted against universally accepted principles of law, therefore declaration against his arrest, detention, trial and imprisonment being unlawful was declined.
Further Court said that the Applicant has not proved violation of the principles of law enshrined in Articles 6(d) and 7 (2) or the Treaty, hence Court not satisfied and declined to declare that the Republic of Rwanda violated the EAC Treaty and principles of good governance and rule of law as well as his conviction was unlawful as sought by the Applicant.
In addition Court considered that granting orders that the sentence imposed on the Applicant in Criminal Case No.RP0017/14/HC/KIG and be set aside as well as an order that the Applicant’s conviction be hereby set aside, would be tantamount to exercise an appellate jurisdiction over national courts, which jurisdiction the court is not clothed with, hence such orders sought declined to be granted.
On the prayer Court to award general damages to the Applicant, the Court said that it may award general damages in an appropriate case, however, in this case, it we are unable to do so because the Applicant has not proved his claims in his Reference hence prayer was declined. Similarly, Court found no basis to award aggravated and exemplary damages as sought by the Applicant, having not succeeded in his case.
Furthermore, Court noted that, the Applicant in his Written Submissions raised a claim for his unpaid monthly earning. Court retaliated that, such a claim is akin to a claim for special damages and that it is according to the law, that specific damages must be pleaded and proved. That In this case, they were not pleaded. In any event, the Applicant has not even succeeded in the Reference, hence the prayer was disallowed.
In conclusion, the Court said that, with regard to the prayer for costs, as stated in Rule 111(1), costs follow the event unless the Court for good reasons otherwise orders. In this case, the Applicant having failed to prove his claims under this Reference, he would not be entitled to costs. Ordinarily, he should be subjected to pay costs to the Respondent. However, the Court is aware that the Applicant could not afford to engage a lawyer to represent him initially and that the ones that represented him subsequently were doing so under a legal aid brief by the East African Law Society. In the circumstance, it is in the interest of justice that each party bears its own costs.
The Lawyer representing the Applicant, after the Judgment was delivered, he requested Court to provide him with the copies of the pleadings and the Judgment to enable him Appeal to the Appellate Division.
The Judgment was delivered by Honorouble Lady Justice Monica Mugenyi, (Principal Judge), Justice Isaac Lenaola (Deputy Principal Judge), Justice Dr Faustin Ntezilyayo, Justice Fakihi Jundu, and Justice Audace Ngiye
The Applicant was represented by Mr Joel Kimutai Bosek an Ms Moureen Okoth whilea the Respondent was represented by Counsel Arnest William holding brief for Nicholas Ntarugera Counsel for the Respondent AG Rwanda
Notes for Editors:
The Applicant underwent two different cases for two different charges or offences. In the first trial, he was arrested, detained, prosecuted, found innocent, acquitted and was accordingly released, while in the second trial he was arrested, detained, prosecuted, found guilty, convicted and sentenced to ten (10) years imprisonment.
In the first criminal case, the Applicant was arrested on 8th November, 2013, detained and charged with the offences of defamation, insulting a person in a private area, conspiracy against the Government of Rwanda and being in illegal possession of arms (a grenade). He was acquitted of the charges on 31st March, 2014 and released on 2nd April, 2014.
In the second criminal case, the Applicant was arrested on 2nd April, 2014, detained and charged with a different offence to wit inciting insurrection or trouble amongst the population. The Applicant was tried on the said offence and on 8th April, 2015 was found guilty, convicted and sentenced to ten (10) years imprisonment.
The Skype Chat documents, the WhatsApp conversation between the Applicant and one Munyampeta Jean Damascene was discovered in his seized laptop and produced before the trial court as evidence in the case against him of inciting insurrection or trouble amongst the population and the same were discovered after issuance of the decision to intercept the relevance communication and correspondence by the National Prosecutor, one Ruberwa Bonaventure on 25th October 2013.
ENDS
For more information, please contact:
Yufnalis Okubo Registrar East African Court of Justice Arusha, Tanzania Tel: +255 27 2162149 mail: Okubo [at] eachq.org www.eacj.org
About the East African Court of Justice:
The East African Court of Justice (EACJ or ‘the Court’), is one of the organs of the East African Community established under Article 9 of the Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community. Established in November 2001, the Court’s major responsibility is to ensure the adherence to law in the interpretation and application of and compliance with the EAC Treaty.
Arusha is the temporary seat of the Court until the Summit determines its permanent seat. The Court’s sub-registries are located in the respective National Courts in the Partner States.
East African Court of Justice Arusha, 30th September, 2018: The First Instance Division declined to grant Ex parte orders (orders given in the absence of the party against) in the Application filed by One Prof Paul Kiprono Chepkwony seeking Court orders to direct the government of Kenya to provide temporary school facilities to enable pupils pursue their education for the national examination (Kenya Certificate of Primary Education), whose schools were closed or destroyed by the government agents. The Applicant filed this Application for the mentioned orders pending the determination of the Inter parte Application (between two parties).
The Court in its Ruling said that in the absence of evidence of the current status quo in the matter before us, as well as to avoid the unnecessary eventuality of issuing superfluous orders in that regard; the court refrained from issuing the Orders sought without giving the Respondent the opportunity to be heard.
Court further said that, status quo of the matter is, after hearing from the Applicant that no arrangements whatsoever had been made by the Government of Kenya to ensure the continuity of the affected minors’ education, no supportive evidence was furnished to Court as would lend credibility to this contention. That documentary evidence indicative of the Respondent’s refusal or omission to ensure the said continuity would have been pertinent in that regard.
In addition, the Court noted that as an organ of the Community, the Court is also enjoined to observe the principles of the Community in actualization of its mandate. Thus, under Article 23(1) of the Treaty the Court is enjoined to ensure ‘adherence to the law’ in the execution of its mandate, as it was correctly submitted by Counsel for the Applicant, that Partner States are enjoined to observe the principles in Article 6(d) of the Treaty in pursuit of the objectives of the East African Community.
However, Adherence to the law in that regard necessarily entails giving due regard to the principles of fair trial and due process in the promotion of the rule of law. Quite obviously, the dictates of fair trial, due process and natural justice would require that all parties to a dispute are heard before a decision in respect thereof is made. The only exception to this cardinal judicial practice would arise in deserving cases as captured in Rule 21(2) of our Rules.
Court to grant Interim Orders is generally governed by Article 39 of the Treaty, which provides that; “The Court may, in a case referred to it, make any interim orders or issue any directions which it considers necessary or desirable.Interim orders and other directions issued by the Court shall have the same effect as interim as decisions of the Court.” The Court added that legal provision does not draw any distinction between ex parte and inter parte applications thereof. Also it stated that, provision for such applications to be heard ex parte is enclosed in Rule 21(2) of the Court’s Rules of Procedure for deserving cases. The Rule provides that “No motion shall be heard without notice to the parties affected by the application. Further, that provided, however, that the First Instance Division, if satisfied that the delay caused by proceeding in the ordinary way would or might entail irreparable injustice, may hear the motion and make an ex parte order upon such terms as to costs or otherwise, and subject to such undertaking, if any, as the Division deems just.
In addition, Court said that after hearing carefully the Counsel for the Applicant, it noted that, in his arguments he did not specifically address the issue of irreparable injustice his client stood to suffer in the event that the sought ex parte Order was denied, that he however suggested that it will be argued at the hearing in the main case (Reference) to the interruption the impugned evictions had occasioned to the 5,000 minors affected by the said action, and more so, those of them that were due to sit the KCPE examinations.
Further court said that, it is live on the interim nature of this Application and would not, therefore, wish to pre-empt the merits of the same Application to be heard inter partes. It is also persuaded as to the gravity of the issues raised by the Applicant, indeed, it seems apparent on the face of the record that those issues arise from a historical land question. However, for purposes of application for ex parte Orders such as this before court, it is imperative that a court weighs the justice of granting (even on temporary basis) the orders sought without hearing from the opposite party against the urgency of the sought orders and the injustice of disallowing the same.
The Court hence disallowed the Application with no orders to costs and also ordered that the Application for interim orders inter partes be fixed for hearing forthwith and due service in respect thereof be undertaken.
The Application was supported by the Affidavit of Prof. Kiprono Chepkwony (Applicant), which raises matters of grave concern including allegation of forceful plus arbitrary evictions; destruction of residential properties and government – inspired racial polices based on hatred, in respect of which prompted cries the Respondent’s Ministry of Education has allegedly remained silent. It is suggested in the same Affidavit that more than five thousand (5,000) minors have been forced out of school as a result of the evictions and destruction of schools, a number of whom had registered for the KCPE examination but have since been allegedly banned from accessing their schools.
Notes for Editors:
In Reference pending before the First Instance Division, the Applicant is challenging alleged actions of the Respondent’s officers and/or agents of the forcefully eviction of the civilian population from their dwelling places and homes adjacent to Mau Forest in a cruel, horrifying, degrading, traumatizing and inhuman manner.
The Applicant, Prof. Paul Kiprono Chepkwony is a Kenyan citizen and Governor of Kericho County. The Applicant brings this action in his private capacity and on behalf of minors evicted from Mau Forest between June to August 2018. The Applicant has been given the authority by the parents and/or guardians of the minors.
It is the Applicant’s case that, the urgency of this Application is borne by the fact that, the Government of Kenya through the Ministry of Environment and Forestry and its officers carried out evictions of thousands of people who have been residents in the farms adjacent to the Mau Forest Complex for several decades causing serious humanitarian crises and human rights abuses that have adversely affected the government responsibility to provide education.
That the Government of Kenya has failed to adhere to the principle of good governance and the rule of law as envisaged in the Treaty establishing the East African Community by evicting the Applicants from their homes without due notice and provisions of alternative living and learning centres for the primary schools pupils.
Further pupils from 23 primary schools have been denied basic rights, such as food, shelter, health facilities and access to pre-primary and primary education.
The Applicant alleges that, the Government of Kenya is practising open and outright discrimination by punishing young children because of apparent poverty and landlessness of their parents and/or guardians.
Further that schools opened after August 2018 holiday and the pupils whose parents and/or guardians were evicted cannot go back to school as they have been displaced from their homes and some of the schools were destroyed by the government agents. That the candidate pupils who have been registered for Kenya Certificate of Primary Education (KCPE) have been denied ample facilities to prepare for the said exams, when the rest of the pupils in the Country are busy preparing for the exams.
The Ruling was delivered by Honorouble Lady Justice Monica Mugenyi, (Principal Judge), Justice Dr Faustin Ntezilyayo (Deputy Principal Judge), Justice Fakihi Jundu, Justice Audace Ngiye & Justice Dr Charles Oyo Nyawello.
The Applicant Prof Paul Kiprono Chepkwony was present in Court with his Advocates Mr Joel Kimutai Bosek & Ms Moureen Okoth.
ENDS
For more information, please contact:
Yufnalis Okubo Registrar East African Court of Justice Arusha, Tanzania Tel: +255 27 2162149 mail: Okubo [at] eachq.org www.eacj.org
About the East African Court of Justice:
The East African Court of Justice (EACJ or ‘the Court’), is one of the organs of the East African Community established under Article 9 of the Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community. Established in November 2001, the Court’s major responsibility is to ensure the adherence to law in the interpretation and application of and compliance with the EAC Treaty.
Arusha is the temporary seat of the Court until the Summit determines its permanent seat. The Court’s sub-registries are located in the respective National Courts in the Partner States.
East African Community Headquarters, Arusha, Tanzania, 29th September, 2018: This morning the EAC Secretariat hosted a delegation of 17 Senior Indian Army Officers led by Brigadier Sandeep Rawat, who are in the United Republic of Tanzania to acquaint themselves with economic and socio-political development, political perspectives and security outlook of the country.
The Officers were accompanied to the Secretariat by Senior Tanzania People's Defence Force (TPDF) Officers.
Receiving the delegation on behalf of the Secretary General of the East African Community, the Director of Trade, Al haji Rashid Kibowa, commended the cordial relations existing between the Indian government and the regional bloc.
The Director briefed the guests on the current status of the regional integration process and focused on Trade and Multilateral Issues of the East African Community. He expressed appreciation for the contribution that the Indian investors have made in the manufacturing and business sectors in the region.
He informed the officers that the Community had negotiated Trade Agreements including COMESA-EAC-SADC Tripartite Free Trade Area (FTA), Africa Continental FTA, EAC-EU Economic Partnership Agreement, and EAC – U.S Trade and Investment Partnership to facilitate market entry for EAC exports.
The region had also developed a Trade Negotiations Framework (TNF) to guide the Partner States in negotiating trade agreements with third Parties.
The Director also elaborated measures that have been put in place to eliminate Non-Tariff Barriers (NTBs) that remain a serious obstacle to trade within the region.
-ENDS-
For more information, please contact:
Mr Owora Richard Othieno Head, Corporate Communications and Public Affairs Department EAC Secretariat Arusha, Tanzania Tel: +255 784 835021 Email: OOthieno [at] eachq.org
About the East African Community Secretariat:
The East African Community (EAC) is a regional intergovernmental organisation of five Partner States, comprising Burundi, Kenya, Rwanda, Tanzania and Uganda, with its headquarters in Arusha, Tanzania.
East African Community Headquarters, Arusha, Tanzania, 28th September, 2018: The Ministerial Session of the 6th Meeting of the Sectoral Council on Environment and Natural Resources Management (6th SCENR) was today called off due to lack of quorum at the EAC Headquarters.
The Rules of Procedure for the Council of Ministers provide that quorum of the meeting of the Council is all Partner States’ representation. The representation at the Ministerial Session of the Council requires a Minister or Ministers designated by that Partner State.
When the meeting convened at the Ministerial level to receive the Report of the Coordination Committee this afternoon, it was realized that there were no Ministers from some Partner States to attend the Meeting hence the call off. The Secretariat is consulting with the Partner States on when to convene the Ministerial Session either by video conferencing or face to face meeting.
The objective of the 6th Meeting of the Sectoral Council on Environment and Natural Resources Management was to review progress and provide policy guidance on the implementation of Environment and Natural Resource Management matters within the Community.
The meeting was specifically to consider the implementation status of previous Decisions and Directives of the Sectoral Councils/Councils on the environment and natural resources management; Policy, Legal and Institutional Frameworks matters including the Protocol on Environment and Natural Resources Management.
Also on the agenda was the Terrestrial Ecosystems matters; Aquatic Ecosystems matters; Pollution Control matters; Climate Change matters; and Disaster Risk Reduction and Management matters.
-ENDS-
For more information, please contact:
Mr Owora Richard Othieno Head, Corporate Communications and Public Affairs Department EAC Secretariat Arusha, Tanzania Tel: +255 784 835021 Email: OOthieno [at] eachq.org
About the East African Community Secretariat:
The East African Community (EAC) is a regional intergovernmental organisation of five Partner States, comprising Burundi, Kenya, Rwanda, Tanzania and Uganda, with its headquarters in Arusha, Tanzania.
East African Court of Justice Arusha, 28th September, 2018: The First Instance Division on Thursday allowed the Applicant (Uganda Civil Aviation Authority (UCAA)) to appear as an Intervener in Reference No.11 of 2017, a Case filed by Uganda Revenue Authority (URA) challenging the government’s decision to the effect that URA is obliged to pay rent for the Customs Department at Entebbe International Airport. The First Respondent (URA) challenges the said decision as being unlawful and in contravention of the Treaty thus directly questioning the mandate of the Applicant.
The Court granted leave to the Applicant to intervene in the matter mentioned above and that its participation shall be limited to such support of the Second Respondent (Attorney General Uganda) as is propounded under Rule 36(2)(e) and (5) of the Rules. The Court further took the view that it would be in the wider interests of justice that it admits the Applicant as intervener but such intervention would be to the parameters of Rules mentioned above.
The Court was also persuaded by the 2nd Respondent’s argument, that the Applicant’s said legal interest would be substantially affected by a contrary decision by this Court hence the need for the Applicant to be granted leave to intervene and present its intrinsic interests in that regard.
The Court also said it has carefully considered the Notice of Motion and find a Statement of Interest therein. It is clear to the Court that the outcome of the Reference before the Court has, with or without intervention, a direct impact on the Applicant. That the remedies sought by the First Respondent (URA) have a bearing and a direct effect on the Applicant’s (UCAA) supposedly legitimate expectation of payment for use of its spaces at Entebbe International Airport. Needless to say, it is not the Second Respondent (AG Uganda) who is likely to bear the brunt of a decision in favour of the First Respondent in the Reference.
The Court added that the First Respondent conceded in his submissions at the hearing that “the case arose from menacing demands for rent by the Applicant from the URA (First Respondent), for the latter’s occupancy and use of aerodromes at Entebbe International Airport for customs purposes.”
In conclusion, Court In arriving at this decision, it was mindful of the fact that, a Court faced with an Intervener’s statement may only take what it considers relevant from such an intervener in light of Article 40 of the Treaty, the ultimate control over an Intervener’s intervention remaining with the Court itself. The Court ordered each party to bear its own costs.
On 4th September 2017, the Attorney General of Uganda (“the Second Respondent”) rendered a decision against the Uganda Revenue Authority (“the First Respondent”) in favour of the Civil Aviation Authority of Uganda (“the Applicant”), in a dispute as to payment of rent by the former for the occupation and use of office space at Entebbe International Airport.
The First Respondent (URA) subsequently filed Reference No.11 of 2017 the Uganda Revenue Authority vs. the Attorney General of Uganda in this Court, challenging the legality of that decision on account of its alleged violation of the Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community (“the Treaty”) and the East African Community Customs Management Act (“the EACCMA”).
By its Notice of Motion dated 5th December, 2017 and filed on 11th December, 2017, the Applicant (UCAA) has since sought leave, pursuant to the provisions of Article 40 of the Treaty and Rules 21 and 36 of the East African Court of Justice Rules of Procedure 2013 (“the Rules”), to be joined as an intervener in the Reference in opposition to the case advanced by the First Respondent which has been allowed and granted by court.
The Ruling was delivered by Honorouble Lady Justice Monica Mugenyi, (Principal Judge), Justice Dr Faustin Ntezilyayo (Deputy Principal Judge), and Justice Audace Ngiye.
Parties present in Court to receive the Ruling were Mr Michael Mafabi representing the Applicant (Uganda Civil Aviation Authority (UCAA)), Mr George Okello & Ms Barbra Nahone Ajambo both representing the 1st Respondent (Uganda Revenue Authority (URA)), Ms Christine Kaahwa, Mr George Karemera both representing the 2nd Respondent (Attorney General of Uganda).
Notes for Editors:
Article 40 of the Treaty provides that; A Partner State, the Secretary General or a resident of a Partner State who is not a party to a case before the Court may, with leave of the Court, intervene in that case, but the submissions of the intervening party shall be limited to evidence supporting or opposing the arguments of a party to the case.
Rule 36 of the Court’s Rules of Procedure. It reads:
An application for leave to intervene under Article 40 of the Treaty and an application for leave to appear as amicus curiae shall be by notice of motion.
An application under sub-rule (1) shall contain –
A description of the parties;
The name and address of the intervener;
A description of the claim or reference;
The order in respect of which the intervener or amicus curiae is applying for leave to intervene;
A statement of the intervener’s or amicus curiae’s interest in the result of the case.
The applicant shall serve on each party who shall, within thirty (30) days, file and serve a response.
If the Court is satisfied that the application is justified, it shall allow the intervention and fix a time within which the intervener or amicus curiae may submit a statement of intervention and the Registrar shall supply to the intervener or amicus curiae copies of the pleadings.
The intervener or amicus curiae shall accept the case as it is at the time of intervention.
ENDS
For more information, please contact:
Yufnalis Okubo Registrar East African Court of Justice Arusha, Tanzania Tel: +255 27 2162149 mail: Okubo [at] eachq.org www.eacj.org
About the East African Court of Justice:
The East African Court of Justice (EACJ or ‘the Court’), is one of the organs of the East African Community established under Article 9 of the Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community. Established in November 2001, the Court’s major responsibility is to ensure the adherence to law in the interpretation and application of and compliance with the EAC Treaty.
Arusha is the temporary seat of the Court until the Summit determines its permanent seat. The Court’s sub-registries are located in the respective National Courts in the Partner States.
East African Court of Justice Arusha, 27th September, 2018: The First Instance Division declined to grant the Applicants the leave sought to appear as amicu curiae (friends of the Court) in a matter that challenges the government’s order (a Ministerial Ordinance No. 530/1922) dated 19th October 2016, that banned activities and programs of five Burundian non-governmental organizations and froze their accounts and assets.
The Court in its Ruling said that the Application falls short on proof of the Applicants’ expertise, neutrality or fidelity to the law and would therefore not succeed had it considered its merits. Further Court said that the benefits of the concept of amicus curiae hinge significantly on the neutrality, impartiality and independence of prospective amicus curiae, as well as the expertise it avails to a court underscored by its provable fidelity to the law.
That If sufficiently established by an applicant, these parameters would significantly hinder or mitigate the incidence of subjectivity or mal-advice in a successful applicant’s amicus brief. They would be, to that extent, fundamental determining factors in an application for leave to appear as amicus curiae. Consequently, an application that does not reasonably demonstrate proof of the foregoing factors would not justify an applicant’s admission as amicus curiae.
In addition Court said that it found no justification to satisfy the Court that the Application is justified as required under Rule 36(4) of the Court’s Rules to grant the Applicants leave to join matter Reference No. 12 of 2016 as amicus curiae.
Court also said that no reference whatsoever was made to or proof furnished of the Applicants’ neutrality. Most certainly, the Applicants’ expertise (had it been proven) would not in itself have amounted to sufficient proof of neutrality by the Applicants.
Further the Court said that, it reasons from the foregoing Rule a mandatory requirement for all formal applications filed in this Court to be supported by affidavits. Thus, in the absence of the sole Affidavit in support thereof, it follows that the Application before us remains unsupported by any affidavit and, to that extent, contravenes the mandatory provisions of Rule 21(5).
The Court hence dismissed the Application with no orders to costs. The Ruling was delivered by Honorouble Lady Justice Monica Mugenyi, (Principal Judge), Justice Dr Faustin Ntezilyayo (Deputy Principal Judge), and Justice Fakihi A. Jundu.
Parties present in Court to receive the Ruling were Dr Anthony Kafumbe representing the Secretary General of EAC and Wanjiru Mnaro holding brief for Catherine Anite representing the Applicants.
The Applicants (3 NGOs) are: KENYA HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION (KHRC); FOUNDATION FOR HUMAN RIGHTS INITIATIVE (FHRI) & INTERNATIONAL FEDERATION FOR HUMAN RIGHTS (FIDH)
Notes For Editors:
Applications for leave to appear as amicus curiae in this Court are governed by Rule 36 of the Court’s Rules of Procedure. It reads:
An application for leave to intervene under Article 40 of the Treaty and an application for leave to appear as amicus curiae shall be by notice of motion.
An application under sub-rule (1) shall contain –
A description of the parties;
The name and address of the intervener;
A description of the claim or reference;
The order in respect of which the intervener or amicus curiae is applying for leave to intervene;
A statement of the intervener’s or amicus curiae’s interest in the result of the case.
The applicant shall serve on each party who shall, within thirty (30) days, file and serve a response.
If the Court is satisfied that the application is justified, it shall allow the intervention and fix a time within which the intervener or amicus curiae may submit a statement of intervention and the Registrar shall supply to the intervener or amicus curiae copies of the pleadings.
Rule 21 (5) provides that: Every formal application to the First Instance Division shall be supported by one or more affidavits of the applicant or of some other person or persons having knowledge of the facts…
ENDS
For more information, please contact:
Yufnalis Okubo Registrar East African Court of Justice Arusha, Tanzania Tel: +255 27 2162149 mail: Okubo [at] eachq.org www.eacj.org
About the East African Court of Justice:
The East African Court of Justice (EACJ or ‘the Court’), is one of the organs of the East African Community established under Article 9 of the Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community. Established in November 2001, the Court’s major responsibility is to ensure the adherence to law in the interpretation and application of and compliance with the EAC Treaty.
Arusha is the temporary seat of the Court until the Summit determines its permanent seat. The Court’s sub-registries are located in the respective National Courts in the Partner States.
East African Court of Justice, Arusha, 25th September, 2018: The First Instance Division has granted an interim order restraining the government of Tanzania and its agents from evicting the residents of Ololosokwan Village Council and 3 other Villages from the disputed land bordering Serengeti National Park.
The Court ordered the Respondent to stop evicting, destroying the Residents’ homesteads or confiscating their livestock on that disputed land comprised of 1500 sq km of a land in the Wildlife Conservation Area bordering Serengeti National Park until the main Reference is determined.
Further the Court added that, the interim order against the Government (Respondent) restrains the office of the Inspector General of Police from harassing or intimidating the Applicants in relation to the Case pending the determination thereof. Again Court stated that, a grant of the interim orders sought in this case would in effect forestall the continued eviction and harassment of the Applicants’ Residents until the matter is concluded.
The Court also said that whereas evictions, destruction and loss of property and arbitrary arrests that characterized the social upheaval in that village could, if subsequently found to have wrongfully happened at the instance of the Respondent, be compensated by an award of damages. The Court was not persuaded that an award of damages in itself would be adequate recompense for the magnitude of loss that they represent.
That on the other hand stifling of peoples’ right to access to justice, if subsequently proven, appears to court to fall within the category of wrongs that might occasion irreparable injury given that once that right is lost in relation to specific facts.
The Court also carefully considered the totality of the circumstances of this case and it took the view that, in the short term, the important duty to avert environmental and other ecological concerns pales in the face of the social disruption and human suffering that would inevitably flow from the continued eviction of the Applicants’ residents.
It is undoubtedly apparent to the Court that the justice of the matter dictates a temporary intervention in favour of the residents’ representatives, to wit the Applicants. That the Party/ Applicant stands to suffer significantly more injustice, should the court decline to grant a temporary injunction in this matter than does the Respondent, therefore the balance of convenience is heavily skewed/tilted in its favour of the Applicant.
In addition Court said that the Applicants’ claim to protection from the violation of their property rights, as well as the right to access justice, would be weighed against the Respondent’s right to implement the Tanzania natural resources laws to protect the Wildlife Conservation Area from unlawful human activity, as well as its duty to ensure compliance by all persons with the Tanzania legal regime generally.
The Court hence allowed the Application and ordered that costs shall abide the outcome of the Reference and directed the matter to be fixed for hearing. The Application was filed on 21st September 2017 seeking temporary halt to the residents’ eviction and the destruction of their property pending the determination of the main Reference.
The Ruling was delivered by Honorouble Lady Justice Monica Mugenyi, (Principal Judge), Justice Dr Faustin Ntezilyayo (Deputy Principal Judge), and Justice Fakihi A. Jundu.
Parties present in Court to receive the Ruling were Mr Nelson Ndeki representing the Applicants.
Notes for Editors:
On 4th August 2017, the four Village Councils namely; Ololosokwan Village Council, Oloirien Village Council, Kirtalo Village Council and Arashi Village Council, received directives from the Government directing residents to remove their cattle and their homesteads from the Serengeti National Park to the West and in Loliondo Game Controlled Area, regardless of the legal proof of ownership of the disputed land.
On 5th August 2017, each Applicant was ordered by the Government through Ngorongoro District Commissioner to vacate their residents from the demarcated area bordering the Serengeti National Park and that the alleged eviction, removal of livestock and burning of their bomas (homesteads) took place on land that legally belongs to the Applicants.
The above alleged actions by the Respondent led to filing of Reference No. 10 of 2017 seeking orders for a permanent halt to their residents’ eviction, arrest and prosecution, as well as the destruction of their properties and reparations. The Applicants allege that the Respondent’s acts, orders and decisions violate Articles 6(d) and 7(2) of the Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community, as well as the Constitution of the United Republic of Tanzania, Village Land Act, 1999, Wildlife Conservation Act, 2009.
ENDS
For more information, please contact:
Yufnalis Okubo Registrar East African Court of Justice Arusha, Tanzania Tel: +255 27 2162149 mail: Okubo [at] eachq.org www.eacj.org
About the East African Court of Justice:
The East African Court of Justice (EACJ or ‘the Court’), is one of the organs of the East African Community established under Article 9 of the Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community. Established in November 2001, the Court’s major responsibility is to ensure the adherence to law in the interpretation and application of and compliance with the EAC Treaty.
Arusha is the temporary seat of the Court until the Summit determines its permanent seat. The Court’s sub-registries are located in the respective National Courts in the Partner States.
East African Community Secretariat, Arusha, Tanzania, 25th September, 2018: The East African Community today held prayers for the more than 200 passengers who perished in the MV Nyerere ferry accident on Lake Victoria on 20th September, 2018.
The prayer meeting that was held at the EAC Headquarters in Arusha, Tanzania brought together the Heads and Staff of all EAC Organs based in Arusha, namely the EAC Secretariat, East African Legislative Assembly (EALA) and the East African Court of Justice (EACJ).
In attendance at the prayers were EAC Secretary General, Amb. Liberat Mfumukeko, EALA Speaker Hon. Ngoga Martin and the Judge President of the EACJ, Justice Emmanuel Ugirashebuja.
The prayers were led by EACJ Administrator, Mr. Haji Omar (Muslim) and Pastor David Philip Kimaro of the Calvary Temple, Arusha (Christian).
In his remarks, Amb, Mfumukeko condoled with the President, Government and people of the United Republic of Tanzania in the wake of the unfortunate event.
Amb. Mfumukeko further disclosed that the EAC through the Lake Victoria Basin Commission (LVBC) will continue contributing towards making transport on the lake safer and securer.
“The LVBC has set in motion plans for the construction of Maritime Rescue Coordination Centres that will be supported by 22 Search and Rescue (SAR) Units spread along the shoreline and equipped with telecommunications equipment as well as speed boats and medical facility rescue boats. This project will be implemented over a period of four years starting this year,” said the SG.
“There will be a Regional Maritime Rescue and Coordination Centre in Mwanza, Tanzania and sub-centres in Entebbe, Uganda and Kisumu, Kenya,” he added.
Speaking at the ceremony, EACJ Judge President Justice Ugirashebuja condoled the families of the deceased, the government and people of Tanzania further describing the tragedy as being of unimaginable dimensions.
Justice Ugirashebuja paid tribute to the rescuers and all other actors who did their best to save lives and prevent further losses.
In his remarks, EALA Speaker Hon. Ngoga Martin, disclosed that the Assembly would hold a special debate on the ferry incident when it resumes its sittings today afternoon.
Hon. Martin mourned the tragic loss of valuable workforce in the tragedy, adding that it was notable that the leadership had already set up a taskforce to investigate the causes of the tragedy in addition to recommending measures that would prevent a recurrence in future.
“I pray for the affected families to gather the strength and courage to cope with the loss,” said the Speaker.
-ENDS-
For more information, please contact:
Mr Owora Richard Othieno Head, Corporate Communications and Public Affairs Department EAC Secretariat Arusha, Tanzania Tel: +255 784 835021 Email: OOthieno [at] eachq.org
About the East African Community Secretariat:
The East African Community (EAC) is a regional intergovernmental organisation of five Partner States, comprising Burundi, Kenya, Rwanda, Tanzania and Uganda, with its headquarters in Arusha, Tanzania.
East African Community Headquarters, Arusha, 25th September, 2018: The EAC Secretariat in collaboration with GIZ and the East African Business Council (EABC) flagged off a Media Caravan on Monday, 24th September, 2018, to document and publicize success stories and challenges in the regional integration initiatives focusing on the Pharmaceutical Sector, Mutual Recognition Agreements, and Single Customs Territory in the Partner States.
The Media Caravan/Tour, which involves 13 Journalists, two professional videographers, and one representative from the EAC, EABC and the GIZ Corporate Communication Departments, will last from 24th September to 6th October, 2018 and cover the United Republic of Tanzania, Kenya, Uganda, Rwanda and Burundi.
The Media Caravan/Tour will be conducted in the Republic of South Sudan once the Partner State has made considerable progress in the identified sectors.
The tour commenced at the EAC Headquarters with a training session for the Journalists delivered by the Desk Officers of the identified sectors before departing for the Partner States. During the tour, the media will conduct interviews with Regulatory Bodies, Private Sector leaders (Companies and Associations), Cross Border Traders, Students, Border officials, among other stakeholders.
The Expected Outputs of the Media Caravan are:
Success stories and challenges in the Pharmaceutical Sector, Mutual Recognition Agreements, and Single Customs Territory documented and publicized;
At least 40 stories/ articles published in the participating Media Houses during and after tour;
At least 5 you-tube-video news clips of 3-5 minutes prepared and shared on Social Media. Video Documentaries of 15 minutes, 30 minutes and 1 hourr are also expected;
At least 200 still pictures captured and shared Social Media, EAC publications and Website;
Increased awareness of EAC in the Partner States on the assessed sectors, and;
Increased awareness in the region of the regional initiatives and their benefits.
-ENDS-
For more information, please contact:
Mr Owora Richard Othieno Head, Corporate Communications and Public Affairs Department EAC Secretariat Arusha, Tanzania Tel: +255 784 835021 Email: OOthieno [at] eachq.org
About the East African Community Secretariat:
The East African Community (EAC) is a regional intergovernmental organisation of five Partner States, comprising Burundi, Kenya, Rwanda, Tanzania and Uganda, with its headquarters in Arusha, Tanzania.
East African Science and Technology Commission, Kigali, 24th September 2018: The East African Science and Technology Commission (EASTECO) is a semi-autonomous institution of the East African Community (EAC) that was established by the fifth Extra-Ordinary Summit of the EAC Heads of State on 18th June 2007, in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Treaty on the Establishment of the EAC to promote cooperation in the development of science and technology. EASTECO’s overall objective is to promote and coordinate the development, management and application of science and technology to support regional integration and socioeconomic development.
Intellectual Property (IP) policy generally seeks to strengthen institutional, national and regional abilities to generate and commercially exploit economically valuable IP assets. The ultimate goal of a sound IP policy is to provide short, medium and long-term plans and guidelines that enable stakeholders effectively work together towards identifying, creating, protecting and commercially exploiting research results, innovations and creative works. IP protection, notably Industrial Property protection also provides a foundation for cooperation between universities, R&D institutions and industry, and promotes the transfer of technologies to productive and creative sectors.
The role of IP in stimulating socio-economic development is globally acknowledged with IP assets contributing significantly to National Gross Development Product (GDP) in developed countries. IP protection promotes innovation and affects commerce throughout the economy by providing incentives to invent. It is noteworthy that once acquired, IP assets spur higher quality research leading to enhanced invention, innovation and creative capabilities; encourage technology transfer, development and adaptation (typically through adaptation of public domain technologies); attract foreign direct investments (FDIs); trigger exploitation of traditional knowledge (TK), traditional cultural expressions (TCEs) and genetic resources.
The EAC IP policy will seek to provide a comprehensive framework for effective IP management, as relates to ensuring IP legislation, regulations, practices and strategies in the EAC region support and facilitate the achievement of Partner States, National Visions and Development Plans, as well as the overarching EAC Vision 2050. The overall objective of the EAC Regional IP Policy is to create a dynamic, vibrant and balanced IP system in EAC partner states. The policy will aim to establish an EAC IP system that can stimulate and drive innovation and creativity.
The purpose of this stakeholders meeting is to validate the draft East African Regional Intellectual Property Policy that will facilitate the harmonization of intellectual property rights across the region. This regional event will also provide a platform and opportunity for participative and constructive dialogue, networking and partnerships between stakeholders in the Science, Technology and Innovation Community.
The expected outputs of the regional stakeholders meeting is draft EAC Regional IP Policy validated and with stakeholders’ recommendation for its improvement
The workshop will gather about 65 stakeholders’ representative from EAC Partner States including National Commission/Council for Science and Technology; Ministries responsible for Science, Technology and Innovation; National Departments responsible for Intellectual Property in EAC Partner States; Universities/Academia; National Research Institutions; Private Business and Civil Society sector and Development Partners (UNESCO and UNECA).
The EAC IP Policy development process has been participatory and included national level consultations in all EAC Partner States.
After this consultative process the reviewed draft Regional Policies will be submitted to the EASTECO Governing Board for adoption before consideration and approval by the EAC Council of Ministers.
For more information please contact:
The Executive Secretary, The East African Science and Technology Commission (EASTECO), 2nd Floor Telecom House, Kacyiru, KIGALI – RWANDA. Email: This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it. / This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
