By Evarist Baimu Nyaga Mawalla - Home

An anachronism in a democratic state like Tanzania. Even in England itself theposition changed since 1947 whereby a citizen can sue the government as ofright. And nearly all the Commonwealth countries have done away with therequirement of a ministerial fiat. Tanzania is an odd man out.The requirement of a ministerial fiat militates against the principle ofaccountability and the often quoted principle of openness and transparence ofthe government. The Ontario Law Reform commission of Canada in its reportheaded “Report on the Liability of the Crown, 1989” reported in thecommonwealth Law Bulletin said:The present law governing liability of the Crown, in so far as it still providesprivileges and immunities not enjoyed by ordinary persons is inconsistent withpopular conception of government: Crown immunities are particularly contrary toa deeply – held notion that the government and its – officials ought to be subjectto the same legal rules as private individuals and should be accountable toinjured citizen for its wrongful conduct. A key clement of this concept is the factthat the application of ordinary principles of law to government id placed in thehand of the ordinary courts, who are independent of government and thereforecapable of being relied upon to award an appropriate remedy to a person whohas been injured by unlawful government action 60At the end of the day, the Ontario Law Reform Commission recommended theabolition of the requirement of the ministerial fiat, as it was also found to beinconsistent with the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.In Tanzania under one-party democracy, the spurious justification for having arequirement of the ministerial fiat, was espoused by same party fundamentalists(Wakereketwe) who nursed the idea that the government under the leadership ofthe Chama Cha Mapinduzi (C.C.M) party which had a clear and corrects ideologyhad a greater public interest to preserve and a monopoly of what is good for thecountry and therefore cannot be let to be scandalized in courts by individuals withimpunity. However that view cannot prevail now with the advent of multi-partydemocracy will continue bit by bit to wrench away the mask of invincibility andimpenetrability that the government sought to wear for many years under onepartyrule. 61 Thus the vulnerability of the government to give way for moredemocratic institutions and norms has now been exposed.280