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.

October; 1993, the Regional Commissioner had, therefore, to visit the school witha view to restoring tranquility as the school. He met students as well as membersof staff and after doing so he directed that students return to classrooms while aprobe team he formed, comprising of four government officials, investigated theircomplaints. The probe tear carried out its duties owiftly. It interviewed six schoolleaders and three students, including the second applicant. None of theremaining applicants was interviewed. The team did not interview of him wasrestricted to the stundents grievances. The team collected some informationwhich in its view justified the expulsion of the our applicants from the school.None of the applicants was afforded any opportunity to contradict, correct orcoment on that information. The team recommended to the Board that the fourstudents, who, according to it, were quilty of being ring-leaders of the students;strike at the school, be expelled from school. The Board met on January 20,1994.It did not carry out any investigation of its own. The, applicants weresubsequently informed of Board’s decision and a letter was sent to each parentinforming then of that decision. The four letters were identical in contents. Thereason given for the explations was that the applicants were the righ-leaders ofthe students’ strike and caused turmoil at the school.Does this court have jurisdiction to grant prerogative of certifiorari andmandamus in this matter? This is one of the questions I ask myself and which Iwill endeavourer to answer in this ruling. It can be stated without any fear of601

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

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!