n00b
JF-Expert Member
- Apr 10, 2008
- 1,006
- 2,667
Ujio wa Raila Odinga, utaonyesha aidha unafiki au ujasiri wa magazeti ambayo yaliwekewa pingamizi na mahakama kuandika chochote kuhusu Manji, yakiwamo Mwananchi, Citizen na Raia Mwema, ambayo yakiandika hata mazuri yake yatakua yanakiuka amri ya mahakama. Tusubiri tuone unafiki wao.
Kesi zilizohusu magazeti hayo ni nyingi labda tukumbushane malalamiko yahusuyo kesi hizi kama tulivyoyanasa hapa mahakama kuu
Kesi zilizohusu magazeti hayo ni nyingi labda tukumbushane malalamiko yahusuyo kesi hizi kama tulivyoyanasa hapa mahakama kuu
Blanket ex parte injunctions raise the following concerns;
1. All the injunctions are issued with unprecedented urgency (within 24 hours of being filed), after which the proceedings are then adjourned for several weeks.
It is obvious that the Applicants are only interested in obtaining the initial one-sided orders and it stands to reason that there is every likelihood that these blanket injunctions will remain in force for a very long time.
2. The injunctions are all issued ex parte thereby denying the Respondents the opportunity of being heard.
This state of affairs occurs despite the fact that all of the media houses which have been targeted by Yusuf Manji have registered offices which are closer to the Courts in question than his offices along Nyerere Road. In one extreme case (Dira ya Mtanzania) Yusuf Manji obtained an ex parte injunction from the District Court of Kisarawe although the addresses of the three Defendants are indicated as being in Dar es Salaam.
Your Lord, there are of course circumstances where it may be necessary for a Court to issue a one-sided order, however the law requires an Applicant to give acceptable reasons and for the Court to consider and accept these reasons before it (the Court) can dispense with notice to the other side and proceed ex parte. In none of the injunctions obtained by Yusuf Manji has this legal provision been complied with.
3. The injunctions are excessively restrictive so that they apply to everything under the sun.
These blanket ex parte injunctions are worded in such a manner so as to restrict reporting on not only the subject matter of the case but also every past or future event concerning or connected to the Plaintiff personally or businesses under his management . The end result is that the media is forced into a total blackout concerning Yusuf Manji.
Such an injunction was issued against Mwananchi and the Citizen vide Civil Case number 92 of 2011 filed in the Resident Magistrates Court of Dar es Salaam at Kinondoni in July 2011. The subject matter of this case is a news article concerning a civil case arising from a dispute between a company called Q-Consult Limited and the Kinondoni Municipal Council over the termination of a tender to develop the Oysterbay Beach area. However the injunction is so far-reaching that it has blocked these newspapers from reporting allegations which were raised linking Yusuf Manji to the theft of billions of shillings from the Bank of Tanzania or, when earlier this week he made a donation after the tragic sinking of MV Spice Islander.
4. The injunctions are outrageously extensive.
These blanket injunctions do not only apply to everything but they also apply to everyone. For example the wording in these blanket injunctions says:
Respondents, their employees both current and future, their shareholders, those associated by both financial and/or political and/or personal interests in the Respondents, their agents, assignees and associates, declared and not declared .
One is left to wonder if any Tanzanian is left who is not covered by these injunctions.
Your Lord, as we write this letter blanket ex parte injunctions have been issued in the following cases;
a. Civil Case number 92 of 2011 filed in the Resident Magistrates Court of Dar es Salaam at Kinondoni against Mwananchi, the Citizen and Mwananchi Communications Limited.
b. Civil Case number 94 of 2011 filed in the Resident Magistrates Court of Dar es Salaam at Kinondoni against Mwanahalisi (including Mseto) and Printech Company Limited.
c. Civil Case number 14 of 2011 filed in the Resident Magistrates Court of Morogoro against Mwanahalisi, Halihalisi Publications Limited and Printech Company Limited.
d. Civil Case number 43 of 2011 filed in the District Court of Temeke against Mwanahalisi, Halihalisi Publications Limited and Printech Company Limited.
e. Civil Case number 4 of 2011 filed in the Distrct Court of Kisarawe against Dira ya Mtanzania, Dira Media Group Limited and Printech Company Limited.
f. Civil Case number 4 of 2011 filed in the Resident Magistrates Court of Dar es Salaam at Kinondoni against Raia Mwema and its printers Imprint Limited.
g. Civil Case number 5 of 2011 filed in the Resident Magistrates Court of Dar es Salaam at Kinondoni against Tanzania Daima, Free Media Communications Limited and its printers Mwananchi Communications Limited.
Similar blanket injunctions are pending against the following;
a. High Court Civil Case no 135 of 2011 against Nipashe, the Guardian, ThisDay, Kulikoni, ITV, Radio One and all the other media owned by Reginald Mengi and;
b. High Court Civil Case no 144 of 2011 against Nipashe, the Guardian, ThisDay, Kulikoni, ITV, Radio One and all the other media owned by Reginald Mengi.
Your Lord, in the opinion of MOAT these blanket ex parte injunctions are an abuse of the Court process and constitute a muzzling of the free press. They are unacceptable and pose a direct threat to the right of freedom of expression which is protected by Article 18 of the Constitution. For example if the employees of any of his many companies went on strike today none of the above media would be able to report the event although it is of public interest.
MOAT has no doubt that if the situation is not arrested and these abnormal injunctions are allowed to become commonplace, they will eventually undermine the very fabric of our society. What if everyone who has been reported in the media decides to obtain one of these blanket ex parte injunctions!
Your Lord, MOAT urges you to urgently intervene so that orders which have already been issued are reversed and a stop is put to any further abuses of the Court process. MOAT insists that you launch enquiries to determine whether the procurement of these orders was tainted with corruption and if so ensure that the appropriate action is taken against those individuals involved to protect the good name and integrity of our judiciary.
