By Evarist Baimu Nyaga Mawalla - Home

Before I decide what orders, if any, to make in this application I must deal,abeit briefly, with Mr. Mbogoro’s submission that an order of prohibitionwould, bearing in mind the Regional Commissioner’s alleged. Announcementthat the formation of the probe team to inquire into the students’ complaintswould be the closing chapter of the events which took place at and outsidethe school following the raising of complaints by students, be a more justorder than orders of certiorari and mandamus. I have anxiously and, I hope,carefully considered this argument, but in the end I am of the settled opinionthat the argument is singularly devoid of merit. Assuming that the regionalCommissioner did make the alleged announcement, I must say at once thatthere is no provision in any legislation, whether principal or otherwise, andthere is no principle or rule of common law which makes the allegedannounce legally binding on the Board. There is, therefore, no basis forissuing an order of prohibition in this case.A decision of a domestic tribunal affecting the rights or interest of anindividual which is made in violation of the principles of natural justice is nodecision in law. Such a decision is a nullity. Inspite of the ingenuity which hasbeen expended by Mr. Shio in his gallant attempt to persuade to hold that theapplication ought to be dismissed, I am of the settled opinion that the ordersfor expulsion whose validity the applications have challenged fall under thiscourt’s as every lawyer knows, are discretionary remedies. Viewing the meritsand equities of the application I have no doubt that justice demands that the612