Judge Lila pulls out of Sheikh Ponda case

HIGH Court Judge Shaban Lila has disqualified himself from hearing the appeal lodged by Sheikh Ponda Issa Ponda to oppose conviction and sentence imposed on him by Kisutu Resident Magistreate’s Court over his involvement in a plot dispute.

The judge said when the matter came for mention before him last week that he does not feel comfortable to preside over the appeal in question.

Following such development, Judge Lila returned the case file to the judge in charge for reassignment of another adjudicator.

Sheikh Ponda, the Secretary of the Council of Islamic Organization, was convicted by Resident Magistrate Victorian Nongwa of one count of forcible entry to the plot situated at Chang’ombe area in Temeke District and given a suspended sentence of 12 months.

The magistrate convicted Ponda of forcible entry, but gave him such lenient sentence after considering number of factors, including being in remand for a long time and that he was convicted of a “not scheduling offence”, meaning it does not provide the sentence to be given.

Magistrate Nongwa had to resolve to other sections to look for appropriate sentence to be provided to the convict. “You’re required to be a man of peace and good behaviour for all this period.

Refrain from committing any other crimes,” she told Ponda when sentencing him. The court had been told that the Muslims Council of Tanzania (Bakwata) exchanged the plot with Agritanza Limited, which had offered a 40-acre plot at Kisarawe for the purpose of constructing a university.

But, according to the magistrate, a section of Muslims claims that what was done by Bakwata was wrong.

She, therefore, directed the parties involved to refer the matter to appropriate courts for determination and faulted the procedure adopted by Sheikh Ponda to reclaim the plot.

“It has been proved that Ponda took laws in his hands, which is not proper. He was seen at the plot and supervised the construction of a temporary mosque at the area.

He might have a good intention, but the procedure he used was not proper,” the magistrate had said.

Daily News:

Read More

Australia bishop charged with abuse

One of the most senior members of the Catholic Church in Australia has stepped aside after being charged with child sex abuse, the Church says.

Bishop Max Davis, who serves as the top Catholic official for the military, is accused of abusing a student in 1969.

In a statement, the Church said he "emphatically denies" the allegations and would defend the charge.

It relates to a period before Max Davis was ordained, when he was a teacher at a Catholic school in Western Australia.

"It is alleged in 1969 the man, who was a teacher at St Benedict's College in New Norcia, indecently assaulted a boy who was 13 years old at the time," Western Australia police said in a statement.

He had been charged with "three counts of Indecent Treatment of Children Under 14", it said.

The bishop is due to appear in court in Perth on 25 July. In its statement, the Church said he had decided to stand aside while the courts dealt with the case.

Max Davis has served as bishop of the Australian Defence Force since 2003.

The case comes as a national inquiry into child sexual abuse continues.

The Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse is examining religious groups, NGOs and state-care providers.

The commission was established by former Prime Minister Julia Gillard and launched in April 2013. The move followed pressure from lawmakers amid police claims the Catholic Church had concealed evidence of paedophile priests.

It has been holding both private and public hearings, and is due to report back in late 2015.

BBC News:

Read More

Thailand court approves graphic warnings on cigarette packages

[JURIST] The Supreme Administrative Court of Thailand on Thursday approved [press release] a new regulation requiring packs of cigarettes sold in the Southeast Asian country to be 85 percent covered with graphic health warnings. The new graphic health warnings have 10 variations, including messages such as "smoking causes lung cancer" and "smoke kills children." Thailand's Ministry of Health's [official website] goals with the implementation of these labels is to reduce new smokers, reduce old smokers in rural areas and reduce threats of second hand smoke. New Thai surveys have shown that new smokers have been increasing on a yearly basis in both children and adults. It is estimated that 50,000 Thai patients were treated or died from diseases caused by cigarettes. The large amount cigarette related diseases has caused for the Thai government and people over a two year period to spend 52,200 million baht on treatments which is the equivalent to .5% of their total GDP.

Graphic warning labels for cigarette packaging have been an ongoing practice around the world. Earlier this year the EU Parliament voted [JURIST report] to approve an anti-tobacco law that requires cigarette makers to increase the size of health warnings on packets from 30 percent to 65 percent of the surface of the package. In August 2012 the High Court of Australia [official website] upheld [JURIST report] a law that requires cigarette packages to display graphic images warning of the dangers of smoking and bans brand logos. In the US there is debate over the constitutionality of graphic cigarette warning labels. The US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit [official website] struck down [JURIST report] graphic warnings in August 2012, holding that the Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) [official website] rule on graphic cigarette label warnings exceeded the agency's statutory authority and undermined tobacco companies' economic autonomy. However, in March 2012 the US Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit [official website] upheld the constitutionality [opinion, PDF] of graphic cigarette warning labels, ruling that portions of the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act (FSPTCA) [HR 1256 text] are a valid restriction of commercial speech and also upheld the FDA's regulations requiring more prominent graphic health warning labels on packaging struck down in an earlier ruling.

Read More

Spain lawmakers approve protections for former king

[JURIST] Spanish lawmakers [official website] on Thursday approved controversial new legal protections for former king Juan Carlos after he lost his total immunity when he abdicated the throne last week. After leaving the throne [JURIST report] for his heir, King Felipe VI, Juan Carlos left himself open to possible legal actions, including a paternity suit [Reuters report] brought by a man claiming to be his son. However, Popular Party politicians added amendments to a pending judicial reform bill to assure Juan Carlos judicial privileges. Under the bill, only the Supreme Court will be qualified to hear cases against Juan Carlos. The bill also extends the privilege to Spain's new queen, Felipe's wife Letizia, and their eight-year-old daughter and heir Leonor, Princess of Asturias. The Popular Party, which holds a majority in Spain's parliament, pushed the amendments through despite reluctance from opposition lawmakers, who believe the ex-king should be accountable like any other citizen. The bill passed with 184 votes in favor [AFP report], 109 abstentions and 32 votes against. It will now go to the upper house for its approval.

King Juan Carlos [BBC profile], on the throne since 1975, rejected the dictatorship of his predecessor, General Francisco Franco, and transitioned the country into a constitutional monarchy. He is best known for having paved the way [WSJ profile] to Spain's current democratic system [JURIST report], which effectively stripped the king and his successors of all executive power in favor of a secondary political status. Juan Carlos was instrumental in helping to thwart a 1981 military coup that sought to bring back a Franco-style regime. With close allies of the king having led the coup attempt along with more recent royal family scandals and national economic hardships, the king's popularity has been compromised over the past several decades. The 78-year-old king has also been struggling with declining health due to old age and deficits suffered from a number of personal accidents and surgeries. The king hopes that his son, 46-year-old Prince Felipe, can rehabilitate the scandal-ridden monarchy during this time of national economic strife and general dissatisfaction with Spain's political nobility.

Read More

Top Malaysian court dismisses 'Allah' case

Malaysia's highest court has dismissed a bid by Christians for the right to use the word "Allah", ending a long legal battle that has caused religious tensions in the Muslim-majority country.

The Catholic Church had been seeking to reverse a government ban on it referring to God by the Arabic word "Allah" in the local Malay-language edition of its Herald newspaper.

But a seven-judge panel in the administrative capital Putrajaya ruled a lower court decision siding with the government stood.

"It (the Court of Appeal) applied the correct test, and it is not open for us to interfere," chief justice Arifin Zakaria said on Monday. "Hence, the application is dismissed."

S Selvarajah, one of the church's lawyers, said the decision meant the end of the court case.

"It's a blanket ban. Non-Muslims cannot use the word," he told the AFP news agency.

Outside the court, which was cordoned off, about a hundred Muslim activists shouted "Allahu Akbar" or "God is great", and held banners that read, "Uniting to defend the name of Allah" ahead of the verdict.

The dispute first erupted in 2007 when the Home Ministry threatened to revoke the publishing permit of the Herald for using the Arabic word in its Malay-language edition.

The church launched a court case to challenge the directive, arguing "Allah" had been used for centuries in Malay language Bibles and other literature to refer to "God" outside of Islam.

But authorities say using "Allah" in non-Muslim literature could confuse Muslims and entice them to convert, a crime in Malaysia.

An appeals court last October reinstated the ban, overturning a lower court's 2009 ruling in favour of the church that had led to a spate of attacks on houses of worship.

SOURCE: Aljazeera.

Read More

Sudanese mother sentenced to death for 'converting to Christianity' freed after international outcry

A Sudanese woman who was sentenced to death on May 15 for apostasy has been freed, one of her lawyers said on Monday. Meriam Yahia Ibrahim gave birth to a baby girl while in prison late last month.

A Sudanese court sentenced Ibrahim to hang for abandoning the Muslim faith of her father, despite having been raised solely by her Christian mother and identifying herself as a Christian.

"Meriam was released just about an hour ago," Mohanad Mustafa told AFP.

Under sharia law, which has been in force in Sudan since 1983, conversions are punishable by death. A Muslim woman also cannot marry a non-Muslim man and any such relationship is regarded as adulterous.

"I am a Christian and I never committed apostasy," she told the judge at her sentencing.

Ibrahim's husband Daniel Wani, a Christian and a US citizen, has also said that Ibrahim identifies as a Christian and was never Muslim, and therefore could not have abandoned the faith.

The court gave her three days to "recant" after her trial but sentenced her to death when she refused.

It also ordered her Christian marriage to be annulled and sentenced her to 100 lashes for adultery.

Ibrahim's case sparked international condemnation, with British Prime Minister David Cameron denouncing the "barbaric" sentence.

(FRANCE 24 with AFP)

Read More

Egypt court sentences Al Jazeera journalists

Two Al Jazeera English journalists have been sentenced to seven years in jail and one to 10 years by an Egyptian court on charges including aiding the Muslim Brotherhood and reporting false news.

The guilty verdicts were announced by a judge on Monday against Peter Greste, Mohamed Fahmy, and Baher Mohamed.

Greste and Fahmy were sentenced to seven years in prison, while Baher Mohamed was sentenced to an additional three years for possession of ammunition. Mohamed was in possession of a spent bullet casing he had found on the ground during a protest.

Other Al Jazeera journalists who were tried in absentia, including Sue Turton and Dominic Kane, were sentenced to 10 years.

Al Jazeera has strenuously rejected the charges against its journalists and maintains their innocence.

Greste, Fahmy, and Mohamed were arrested in December in Cairo as they covered the aftermath of the army's removal of Mohamed Morsi from the presidency in July.

The prosecution said Greste, Al Jazeera's East Africa correspondent, and his Egypt bureau colleagues aided the Brotherhood and produced false news reports of the situation in Egypt.

The Brotherhood, which supported Morsi, was listed as a "terrorist" organisation by the interim Egyptian government shortly before the accused were arrested.

The prosecution produced a number of items as evidence including a BBC podcast, a news report made while none of the accused were in Egypt, a pop video by the Australian singer Gotye, and several recordings on non-Egyptian issues.

The defence maintained that the journalists were wrongly arrested and that the prosecution had failed to prove any of the charges against them.

'Absurd allegations'

Al Anstey, Al Jazeera English managing director, said the verdicts defied "logic, sense, and any semblance of justice".

"Today three colleagues and friends were sentenced, and will continue to be kept behind bars for doing a brilliant job of being great journalists. 'Guilty' of covering stories with great skill and integrity. 'Guilty' of defending people’s right to know what is going on in their world," Anstey said in a statement.

"Peter, Mohamed, and Baher and six of our other colleagues were sentenced despite the fact that not a shred of evidence was found to support the extraordinary and false charges against them.  At no point during the long drawn out 'trial' did the absurd allegations stand up to scrutiny.

"There is only one sensible outcome now - for the verdict to be overturned, and justice to be recognised by Egypt."

Source: Al Jazeera

Read More

Mchungaji Mtikila aibwaga tena Serikali ya Tanzania Mahakama ya Haki za Binadamu Afrika

MAHAKAMA ya Afrika inayoshughulikia masuala ya haki za binadamu, jana imetoa hukumu katika kesi iliyofunguliwa na Mchungaji Christopher Mtikila, ambayo italazimisha kusitishwa kwa Bunge la Katiba ili kupisha utekelezaji wa sehemu ya hukumu hiyo ambayo ni ya kikatiba.

Katika hukumu hiyo, mahakama imeitaka serikali kutekeleza kwa vitendo hukumu iliyotolewa na Mahakama Kuu Juni 14, mwaka jana katika kesi ya kudai mgombea binafsi katika uchaguzi wa ngazi zote, iliyofunguliwa na Mchungaji Mtikila dhidi ya serikali.

Akisoma hukumu hiyo, Rais wa majaji wa mahakama hiyo, Jaji  Sophia Akuffor, mbele ya wawakilishi wa Mwanasheria Mkuu wa Serikali, alitaka serikali ndani ya miezi sita kwanza kutangaza katika gazeti la serikali hukumu iliyompa ushindi Mchungaji Mtikila ya mgombea binafsi na pia kutangaza hukumu hiyo katika wavuti ya serikali.

Jaji huyo aliitaka serikali kuwasilisha katika mahakama hiyo utekelezaji wa hukumu hiyo na kubainisha kuwa imeweka katika mchakato suala la mgombea binafsi ili kutekeleza hukumu hiyo.

Alisema pia katika matangazo hayo, hukumu hiyo iwe imetafsiriwa katika lugha nyepesi ya Kiswahili na Kiingereza ili kuwawezesha wananchi wote kuisoma vizuri.

Hukumu hiyo imeipa serikali miezi tisa iwe imewasilisha kwa maandishi na vielelezo vya kuonyesha imetekelezaje hukumu hiyo ya jana na vipengele vyake vyote vya hukumu.

Mbali ya kuishindilia serikali katika hukumu hiyo, Jaji Akuffor alitupilia mbali madai ya Mchungaji Mtikila katika kesi yake ya msingi namba 011 ya mwaka 2013 ya kutaka kulipwa fidia za gharama za kesi kwa wanasheria wake, gharama za yeye kupewa manyanyaso na serikali akidai haki hiyo kabla ya kufungua kesi hiyo ya kihistoria, na pia gharama alizotumia katika mchakato mzima wa kesi yake ya awali ya kudai mgombea binafsi ambayo alishinda.

Katika msingi wa kesi hiyo ya madai, Mtikila alitaka kulipwa zaidi ya sh bilioni 9 za gharama zote kwa kushinda kesi ya awali, madai ambayo mahakama hiyo baada ya kuyapitia, ilikosa vielelezo vya kuyathibitisha.

Akitupilia mbali madai ya Mtikila kunyanyasika kibinadamu kwa kukosa haki yake ya mgombea binafsi, Jaji Akuffor alifafanua kuwa kwa hukumu iliyotolewa mwaka jana na kumpa ushindi, ilitosha kufidia machungu aliyoyapata katika kuikosa haki hiyo.

Awali Mtikila alipinga mwananchi wa Tanzania kulazimishwa kujiunga na chama cha siasa ndipo apate sifa ya kuwa mgombea katika chaguzi mbalimbali za kisiasa, ikiwemo urais, ubunge na udiwani.

Akizungumza nje ya mahakama baada ya ushindi huo, Mchungaji Mtikila alisema hukumu hiyo ni ushindi mkubwa kwa Watanganyika wote kwani kuanzia sasa watakuwa na nafasi ya kumchagua mtu wanayemuona anawafaa kuwaongoza bila kujali siasa za vyama.

Alisema kwa hukumu hiyo, ni wazi hakuna uwezekano wa kuendelea kwa mchakato wa Bunge la Katiba hadi pale vipengele vya mgombea binafsi vitakapowekwa katika rasimu ya katiba mpya.

“Baada ya hukumu hii, siku chache zijazo naleta tena maombi mapya ya kufutilia mbali Bunge la Katiba kwa kuwa limekiuka katiba ya nchi kwa wajumbe wake kuteuliwa na mtu mmoja kwa maslahi ya kikundi cha watu wachache,” alisema Mtikila.

Alifafanua kuwa katika kesi hiyo ataitaka mahakama iilazimishe serikali kuwaachia wananchi wajitengenezee katiba yao badala ya sasa kutengenezewa katiba na watu wachache, tena wote wakiwa wanasiasa kwa maslahi yao ya kisiasa.

“Jamani wote mnashuhudia jinsi wajumbe waliochaguliwa na mtu kuingia katika Bunge hilo la katiba wengine wakiwa hawana sifa na ambao tutawataja kwa majina wakati ukifika, ambao kazi yao katika Bunge lile ni kuzomea watu tu,” alisema Mtikila.

Akinukuu baadhi ya maneno ya Baba wa Taifa, Mwalimu Nyerere, Mtikila alisema muasisi huyo katika mambo ya msingi ambayo aliona kwa wakati huo bado Watanzania hawana uwelewa nayo wa kutosha, aliyaacha ili kutoa muda kwa wananchi wake wajifunze kwanza.

Mawakili wa serikali waliokuwepo mahakamani hapo, walikataa kuzungumzia hukumu hiyo kwa madai kuwa wao sio wasemaji wa idara hiyo.

Chanzo: Tanzania Daima

Read More

Former Tanesco boss denies wife in court

Former TANESCO managing director William Mhando denied legality of his marital status to Eva Mhando before Kisutu Resident Magistrate's Court in Dar es Salaam yesterday, stating he never married her.

Muhando denied his co-accused in his preliminary plea after the prosecution led by State Attorney Leonard Swai from the Prevention and Combating of Corruption Bureau (PCCB) alleged before resident Magistrate, Frank Moshi, that Mhando being employed by the company as Managing Director committed the offence between December 1 and 31, 2011. 

The wife and three other people yesterday appeared at the Kisutu Resident Magistrate’s Court in Dar es Salaam to answer charges of abuse of position and occasioning loss of Sh884.5m.

Mhando is charged together with his wife, Eva Mhando who is the Managing Director of Santa Clara Supplies Company Ltd, and Tanesco employees France Mchalange, Sophia Misidai and Naftali Kisinga.

The former Tanesco boss and three other employees are charged with abuse of position and occasioning loss of Sh884.5m while his wife faces charges of forgery, uttering false document and obtaining money by false pretences.

It was alleged that when executing his duties Mhando intentionally abused his position by failure to declare interest over Santa Clara Supplies Company Limited, whose directors are his wife and children.

The prosecutor said Mhando, using his influence, made it possible for his wife’s company to be awarded a contract to supply stationeries worth Sh884,550,000 to Tanesco.

By so doing, Mhando violated the Tanesco Code of Ethics and Conduct and the Public Leadership Code of Ethics by allowing Santa Clara Supplies Company Ltd undue advantage of Sh31,747,000.

On the second count it was alleged that between January 6 and July 30, 2011 at unknown place in Dar es Salaam the accused. Eva Mhando, with intent to defraud, forged an audited financial report of Santa Clara Supplies Company for the year 2007/08 purporting to show that Finx Capital House audited the balance sheet of the company while knowing the facts were forged.

Eva is also alleged to forge a transfer of shares and purported to show she transferred her 200 ordinary shares of Sh10,000 in undertaking the so called Santa Clara Supplies Company Ltd to Eveta John Shing’oma.

Swai further alleged that between October 1and 31, 2011 Mhando’s wife being the Managing Director of Santa Clara Supplies Company with intent to obtain Sh31,747,000 from Tanesco submitted false documents such as audited financial report for 2007/8, and list of major contracts the company entered with different firms in two years to the Secretary of TANESCO tender board.

The prosecutor said that on October 17, 2011, the accused Mchalange, Msindai and Kisinga being employed by Tanesco as Principal Accountant, Principal Accountant and Supplies Officer respectively and being members of the evaluation committee for tender number PA /001/11/HQ/G/011 gave false information to the tender board in favour of Eva’s company, the decision that was approved by Tanesco Managing Director.

The accused pleaded not guilty to the charge and they are out on bail after meeting the bail conditions.

The court ordered them to secure two liable sureties who would each sign a bond of Sh8m. The court also barred them from travelling outside Dar es Salaam without the court’s permission.

Swai informed the court that investigations into the case are complete. The case will come up for preliminary hearing on June 13, this year.  

SOURCE: THE GUARDIAN

Read More

Pakistan court lifts Musharraf travel ban

[JURIST] Pakistan's Sindh High Court (SHC) on Thursday lifted a travel ban that had prevented former president Pervez Musharraf from leaving the country. Opponents will have 15 days to challenge the ruling, and Musharraf will not be allowed to leave the country during that time. Musharraf has expressed a desire to visit his sick mother in Dubai, and his lawyer has said that Musharraf will return to Pakistan to face charges.

Musharraf was indicted in March on charges of high treason. If convicted, the former leader could face the death penalty. Musharraf pleaded not guilty to each of the charges against him, including unlawfully suspending the constitution, firing Pakistan's chief justice and instituting emergency rule in 2007. Musharraf called the charges politically motivated, maintained that the country had prospered under his 2001-2008 rule and insisted that his declaration of a state of emergency was not unconstitutional. Also ongoing are proceedings related to Musharraf's involvement in the 2007 Red Mosque killings and the death of former prime minister Benazir Bhutto.

Read More

Nigerian charged with drug trafficking

Dar es Salaam. 

Nigerian national Anthony Okafor yesterday appeared before the Kisutu Resident Magistrates’ Court charged with trafficking in drugs worth over Sh124 million.

Mr Okafor, 52, was, however, not allowed to enter a plea since the court has no jurisdiction to hear the case.

The prosecution, led by Senior State Attorney Prosper Mwangamila, told the court that the accused had in his possession 2,072 grams of cocaine with a street value of Sh124.5 million when he was arrested at the Julius Nyerere International Airport (JNIA) on Saturday.

Mr Okafor was remanded until June 25 when the case will come up for another mention.

Meanwhile, Mr Clarence Kasikila,40, appeared before the same court charged with posing as a government official.

The court heard that the accused went to Tanzania Ports Authority (TPA) offices on June 3 and introduced himself as an official from the Prevention and Combating of Corruption Bureau. He denied the charge and was released on bail until June 25 when the case will be mentioned.

Meanwhile in Arusha, there was tight security when the eight people charged in connection with the April bomb attack at a popular bar appeared in court for the second time.

Armed police and warders ringed the court with people being frisked and their bags searched before they were allowed into the courtroom.

Those who appeared before Senior Resident Magistrate Mustapher Siyani were Mr Abdallah Athumani, Mr Swalehe Hamisi, Mr Abdallah Yasini, Mr Hassan Saidi, Mr Sudi Lusuma, Mr Abdulkarim Hasia and Mr Shabaan Wawa.

They are also accused of recruiting young men in Arusha and elsewhere in the country to join Al Shabaab, a terrorist group based in Somalia which has been blamed for a series of grenade attacks and fatal shootings

The accused pleaded with the Court to order the police to release their mobile phone handsets, passports, clothes, shoes and other items and shoes so that they can hand them over to their relatives.

They claimed their personal items would be in much safer hands if they were handed over to their kin and kith than for them to remain in the police custody.

They also asked the court to allow their relatives to visit them in remand, where they had been locked up in the last two months.

The Citizen:

Read More

EU's top court may define obesity as a disability

The EU's top court is considering a test case which could oblige employers to treat obesity as a disability.

Denmark has asked the European Court of Justice to rule on the case of a male childminder who says he was sacked for being too fat.

Karsten Kaltoft weighs about 160kg (25 stone; 350 pounds). He told the BBC that "bad habits" had made him fat but that his size was "no problem" at work.

The court's final ruling will be binding across the EU.

It is seen as especially significant because of rising obesity levels in Europe and elsewhere, including the US. A survey in England in 2012 found that more than half of adults were obese or overweight.

The Danish courts asked the ECJ judges in Luxembourg to clarify European law in Mr Kaltoft's case.

'Doing job properly'

In an interview with the BBC World Service, Mr Kaltoft denied reports that he was unable to bend low enough to tie children's shoelaces.

Describing his work with children, he said: "I can sit on the floor and play with them, I have no problems like that."

"I don't see myself as disabled," he said. "We hope the outcome is that it's not OK just to fire a person because they're fat, if they're doing their job properly."

When asked if his employer, Billund local authority, had done anything to help him, he said they had paid for him to go to a gym for three months.

"I tried regular exercise. Of course I don't run a marathon, but weight training: I did that, it was OK," he said.

He worked for Billund authority for 15 years and was dismissed, the authority said, because there was a decline in the number of children. No further explanation was given as to why he was selected for dismissal.

Future obligations?

Audrey Williams, an employment discrimination expert at Eversheds law firm, said the judges would have to decide "whether obesity itself should trigger preferential rights, or should only impact where an individual, due to obesity, has other recognised medical issues".

If the judges decide it is a disability then employers could face new obligations, she told the BBC.

Employers might in future have a duty to create reserved car parking spaces for obese staff, or adjust the office furniture for them, she said.

The judges will have to decide whether obesity is covered under the EU's Employment Equality Directive, which outlaws job discrimination on grounds of disability.

BBC News:

Read More

Legislation to govern Vicoba underway

With mushrooming of Village Community Banks (Vicoba) across the country, the government has revealed that a legislation to officially recognise and guide their operations is underway to ensure security of members’ contributions.

Deputy Minister of Finance, Mwigulu Nchemba made the announcement yesterday in Parliament saying after completing the process of officiating the community banks, the government pitch in to assist those that will be deemed to be lagging behind in an effort to support small scale entrepreneurs who heavily depend on them.

The deputy minister was responding to a supplementary question raised by Dastan Kitandula (Kilindi, CCM) who had wanted to know the government’s plan to intervene and assure safety of the money saved in Vicoba by their members.

The MP said so far Vicobas are not being guided by any law, a situation that could jeopardize the indemnity of the money saved by members.

Godluck Ole Medeye (Arumeru West, CCM) also raised a related concern, asking if the government has considered helping the Vicoba raise their finances so as to empower small scale entrepreneurs who depend on them.

Responding to Medeye, the deputy minister said once the legislation is in place, the government can then assist them.

Nchemba further explained that, understanding the importance of providing the citizenry in the villages with financial services, the government is continuing with various efforts including forming a national microfinance policy (2000).

“Following such efforts by the government, there has been an increase of small scale financial entities in the informal financial sector which are neither registered nor guided by any authority but offer financial services in both urban and rural areas,” said Nchemba.

He said such entities include VICOBA, ROSCA, VISLA and ASCA but conceded that these institutions face a lot of challenges and to address them, the deputy minister said, in 2013 the government hired a consultant from the Economic Social Research Foundation (ESRF) to assess the national microfinance policy (2000) so as to obtain a policy that corresponds with the current changes of the sector.

“When this assessment is complete, the government will prepare a bill on the Microfinance Act which will oversee operations of microfinance institutions including Vicobas,” he said.

Nchemba was responding to a basic question raised by Assumpter Mshana (Mkenge) who had wanted to know when the government will empower Vicoba as it does SACCOS, considering that the former has registered enormous achievements compared to the latter. 

SOURCE: THE GUARDIAN

Read More

Court orders Tazara to compensate employees for wrongful retirement

The High Court, Dar es Salaam zone has ordered the Tanzania and Zambia Railway Authority (Tazara) to compensate its 270 former employees who were forced to retire at the age of 55 instead of 60.

The verdict was reached by a panel of three judges after having approved the appeal of the said workers that the decision made by their employer was unlawful.

A panel of Judges John Utamwa and Iman Aboud led by Judge Augustine Mwarija ordered Tazara to pay the employees in question two-year salaries as compensation.

The panel also ordered Tazara to pay the appellants a compensation for not submitting their contribution that used to be deducted every month and channeled to their respective social security funds.

Tazara forced the workers to retire at different times between 2000 and 2005 after turning 55 which is the voluntary retirement age according to the regulation of 1968 that was improved in 1999.

However, the workers objected claiming that the decision of their former employer violated the National Social Security Fund (NSSF) Act No. 9 of 2000 and Treasury Agent No. 1 of 2000, which required them to retire after attaining 60 years of age.

After they were forced to retire, they filed a case in the Labour Division of the High Court against the decision of their former employer, requesting to have the employer reinstate them to their former positions.

The panel stated that in accordance with Treasury Agent No. 1 of 2000, the compulsory retirement age for all employees of public agencies, including the Tazara and other government employees is 60 years.

Furthermore, the court ordered Tazara to pay the appellants compensation of the 24 months of their contributions to social security funds, as when the employer stopped channeling money to the social security funds after the forceful retirement, the employees ended up with small amounts of pensions.  

SOURCE: THE GUARDIAN

Read More

Pele's son sentenced to 33 years in prison

(Reuters)

The son of former Brazil striker Pele has been sentenced to 33 years in prison for laundering money earned from drug trafficking, Brazilian media reported.

Edinho, who played as a goalkeeper for his father's former club Santos, served a jail sentence for drug trafficking between 2005 and 2006. At the time, he admitted to being a drug addict but denied trafficking charges.

He was found guilty of money-laundering on Friday by a judge in the beachside city of Praia Grande. Four other men accused of being part of the same gang received similar sentences.

Edinho, whose real name is Edson Cholbi do Nascimento, is expected to appeal against the judge's decision but must hand over his passport to the authorities. He may be preventively arrested while a higher court considers his appeal.

Edinho, 43, currently works as a goalkeeping coach for Santos. His lawyer was not immediately available for comment.

Pele, widely regarded as the best footballer of all time, helped Brazil win the World Cup three times.

Brazil is hosting this year's World Cup from June 12-July 13.

(Reporting by Walter Brandimarte, editing by Ed Osmond)

Read More