10.07.2015 Views

By Evarist Baimu Nyaga Mawalla - Home

By Evarist Baimu Nyaga Mawalla - Home

By Evarist Baimu Nyaga Mawalla - Home

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS
  • No tags were found...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

Mr. Mselem was at a loss to know under which law the DistrictCommissioner had taken his actions. He submitted that this decision bythe District Commissioner was arbitrary and unlawful far if the DistrictCommissioner purported to have acted under Cap. 104 the applicant didnot fall under the category of persons fit for removal as was requiredunder section 3 of the above mentioned Ordinance (Cap,104) All theapplicants were people with reputable means of livelihood none and beenconvicted any criminal offence and all were of the age that did not renderthem subject to control by other people. Further they had settled homeswithin the Town/District of longer The action by the District Commissionerof Songea therefore was in access of his jurisdiction even if one were tofind that the District Commissioner in ordering the removal of the fiveabove manned applications had been acting under Cap. 104 As for hadbeen issued to him. The reason given for the removal were to the effectthat the said applicant has no work in Songea and was suspected ofhaving illegal dealings in Government trophies. Mr. Mselem submitted thatthe applicant has reputable means of livelihood: had a farm, an hotel anda guest house. The last two businesses were licensed businesses. Hefurther submitted that Cap. 104 does not say that a person suspected of acriminal offence was liable for removal from a certain area. He concludedhis submission for the sixth applicant by stating that like in the case ofthane first five applicants the removal order that had been issued inrespect of the sixth applicant was arbitrary and unlawfulIn concluding his submission for the application, Mr. Mselem asked thecourt to find that a prima facie case had been established in respect of theapplicants and that leave be granted for them to apply letter Ref. No.DAO/T.30/VOL.IV/53 (exhibit P.2) quoted above i.e. that force would beused to remove the applicants to their homes should they fail to leaveSongea District by 30/6/97 and as the applicants if allowed by the courtwere going to be heard not earlier than 30 th June 1987 Mr. Mselem409

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!