Wakilii

Mtikila v A.G. of United Republic of Tanzania and Another (Reference 3 of 2007)

East African Court of Justice · [2007] EACJ 5 · 2007 Application Dismissed AI-generated summary ↓ Download Pin to watchlist Add to matter
Jurisdiction
Uganda
Case Type
Application for review of a ruling dismissing a reference on jurisdictional grounds
Decision
Application for review dismissed with costs to respondents

Observed later treatment

No later-treatment classification is recorded for this judgment.

Citator coverage is limited to judgments in the Wakilii corpus and source-matched treatment records. Absence of a signal is not an assertion that the case remains good law.

AI-generated summary. This summary was generated by AI from the full text of the judgment. It may contain errors or omissions—always read the source judgment before relying on it.

Holding

The Court dismissed the application for review. While acknowledging that the applicant may face injustice if no forum exists to challenge the election, the Court held that it cannot assume jurisdiction where none exists. The determination of whether the High Court of Tanzania has jurisdiction must be made by that court itself, not by the East African Court of Justice. Any conflict between the Elections Act and the East African Legislative Assembly Election Rules must be resolved at the national level.

Outcome

Application for review dismissed with costs to respondents

Facts

The applicant challenged the election of nine members to the East African Legislative Assembly by the Tanzanian National Assembly in October 2006, arguing that only seven should have been elected because two members elected in March 2006 to fill vacancies still had unexpired five-year terms. The Court dismissed the reference on jurisdictional grounds. The applicant then sought review, withdrawing three of five grounds and proceeding on grounds alleging injustice and failure to distinguish the case from precedent. By the time of the review hearing, only nine members (not eleven as alleged) had been sworn in.

Issues

  1. Whether the Court should review its earlier ruling dismissing the reference for lack of jurisdiction on the ground that injustice has been done to the applicant.
  2. Whether the applicant has any available forum to challenge the election of eleven members to the East African Legislative Assembly when only nine should have been elected.
  3. Whether the Court failed to distinguish the present case from the Anyang'nyong'o case.

Orders

  • Application for review dismissed.
  • Costs awarded to the respondents.

Rules and key headnotes

Judicial Review — Grounds for Review — Injustice as Independent Ground
Article 35(3) of the Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community provides five grounds for review, including injustice as a standalone ground not dependent on mistake, fraud, error on the face of the record, or discovery of new facts, thereby providing a wider scope for review than is ordinarily the case.
Jurisdiction — Court Cannot Assume Jurisdiction Where None Exists
A court cannot clothe itself with jurisdiction to deal with a matter when it is convinced that it does not have such jurisdiction, irrespective of whether injustice results to the applicant.
Conflict of Laws — Determination of National Court Jurisdiction
The determination of whether a national court has jurisdiction to deal with a complaint must be made by that national court itself, not by a regional court, even where there appears to be a conflict between national legislation and regional election rules.

Legislation cited (12)

  • Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community Article 9
  • Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community Article 30
  • Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community Article 35(3)
  • Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community Article 48(1)
  • Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community Article 48(1)(a)
  • Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community Article 50(1)
  • Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community Article 51(1)
  • Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community Article 51(3)(c)
  • Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community Article 52(1)
  • Elections Act (Tanzania) s.108(2)
  • East African Legislative Assembly Election Rules (Tanzania) Rule 15
  • East African Legislative Assembly Election Rules (Tanzania) Rule 16

Cases cited (4)

  • The East African Law Society v. The Attorney General of the Republic of Kenya, Application No 8, Ref. No. 3, Ruling (EACJ, June. 22, 2007)
  • Orero v Seko [1984] KLR 238
  • Gharib v Naaman [1999] 2 EALR 88
  • Professor Anyang'nyong'o case (Reference No. 1 of 2006)

Full judgment

↓ Download PDF

The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.

Mtikila v A.G. of United Republic of Tanzania and Another (Reference 3 of 2007) [2007] EACJ 5 (22 June 2007)
Source: this page presents Wakilii’s issue analysis and metadata for a publicly reported Ugandan judgment. Any AI-generated summary is marked as such. Judgment text is sourced from the Uganda Legal Information Institute (ulii.org). Wakilii is not affiliated with ULII.