The Appellant had lodged a petition contending that his basic human rights were violated. He moved the Court under the provisions of Articled 13(1), (4) (5), (6) (a), 18 (c) 22(1) and (2) of the Constitution of the United Republic of Tanzania, 1977 together with the Basic Rights and Duties Enforcement Act [Cap 3 R.E. 2002]. The petition was greeted with a preliminary objection whereby the petition was struck out with costs on the grounds that the Appellant did not first exhaust other remedies before filing the petition.
Aggrieved, the Appellant has preferred this appeal against the said Ruling while fronting three main grounds to the effect that the trial court erred in law and fact by not exercising its powers under the Basic Rights and Duties Enforcement Act [Cap 3 R.E. 2002] and it failed to adequately analyse the contents of the Affidavit and the Petition when making a decision.
Before commencing hearing of the appeal the Court wished to satisfy itself on two issues: whether appeal was properly before the Court because though the record of appeal shows the matter was before a panel of three judges the Ruling and order thereof were signed by a single judge. The Court wished to satisfy itself on the propriety of the Certificate of delay.