Mambo haya yangewezekana Mtikila angeshayakamilisha siku nyingi. Nakupa mfano wa shauri moja tu lililofunguliwa dhidi ya Wadhamini wa CCM na likapigwa chini kilaini na Mahakama Kuu. LUJUNA SHUBI BALLONNZI vs REGISTERED TRUSTEES OF CCM 1996 TLR 203(HC)
Soma muhtasari wa shauri lenyewe uone kama inawezekana.
Headnote
The plaintiff claimed that during the era of the one-party state the ruling party, of which the defendants were its trustees, had acquired many properties through subventions from the government and compulsory contributons from millions of people, the majority of whom were, like the plaintiff, not members of the party. The funds so received as D subventions were misused or mismanaged leading to a huge debt burden upon Tanzanians. The plaintiff sought an order for the defendants to pay the said debt and a declaration that the defendants had no right to the properties they had purportedly acquired. The defendants raised preliminary objections regarding, inter alia, E non-compliance with the law for representative suits and the justiciability of the claims. The Held:
(i) Locus standi is governed by common law according to which a person bringing a matter to court should be able to show that his right or interest has been F breached or interfered with;
(ii) The High Court has the power to modify the applied common law so as to make it suit local conditions;
(iii) The rule of locus standi, in so far as it relates to human rights litigation, must be wide; but there is no basis or justification for widening it to a similar extent in a G private interest litigation as in this case;
(iv) Although the plaint does not expressly say so, it is plain that the plaintiff has purported to file the suit on behalf of himself and also on behalf of all Tanzanians who are not members of the ruling party; but as the suit has been filed without adopting the procedure laid down in Order I Rule 8 of the Civil H Procedure Code, 1966, for instituting representative suits, it is incompetent in law;
(v) Public rights can only be asserted in a civil action by the Attorney General as the guardian of the public interest and a private person can only bring such an action if he claims that the breach complained of constitutes an infringement of his private right or inflicts special damage to him in particular; I
(vi) The plaint in this case does not assert that the plaintiff has suffered
1996 TLR p205
any special damage over and above other Tanzanians on account of the A defendants' alleged misconduct:
(vii) The management of public funds, like the management of the economy and foreign policy of the country, is the prerogative of the executive which, in the exercise of its powers in that field, is accountable to Parliament and does not fall under judicial superintendance or scrutiny; B
(viii) The remedy, if any, for any wrong allegedly committed in relation to funds received by the ruling party does not lie in the judicial field.court also considered the plaintiff's locus standi..