Activists to challenge ruling on cybercrime law

Dar es Salaam. Rights activists yesterday said they would challenge in the Court of Appeal a High Court ruling on the petition that sought to declare the Cybercrimes Act unconstitutional.

In December last year, the High Court overturned only Section 50 of the law as requested by the petitioner, Mr Jebra Kambole, who represented the Tanzania Human Rights Defenders Coalition (THRDC), Legal and Human Rights Center (LHRC) and other groups while declaring the other 19 of the 20 sections of the law constitutional.

Section 50 of the Act, which was enacted by Parliament in 2015, gives the Director of Public Prosecution (DPP) powers to punish a suspect who has voluntarily confessed even before the start of court procedures with subsection 2 saying the DPP’s decision would be final.

The ruling agreed with the petitioner that Section 50 of the law contravened Article 13 of the country’s Constitution, therefore ordering the Attorney General (AG) to amend the section within twelve months.

Yesterday, THRDC coordinator Onesmo Olengurumwa told The Citizen that rights groups were not satisfied with the decision and that they had resolved to appeal anytime this month.  He said they would take the matter before the African Court of Human and People’s Rights (ACHPR) in case justice wouldn’t be realised in the Court of Appeal.

“Experience shows that cases involving government interests are being politicised by judicial systems in the country that is why we are preparing to take the matter to the regional and international courts,” he told The Citizen in a telephone interview, referring to the case on independent candidate among those he claimed to have been politicised.

He said, stakeholders had consulted on decision to appeal the High Court decision, saying that will mark the beginning of a long journey in search for justice domestically and internationally.

Mr Kambole said in spite of being unsatisfied with the ruling they considered themselves as winners.

“It’s because we have managed to show the law is unconstitutional in one part, though other demands have been overturned. Under normal circumstances, it takes years to do what we have done to a law assented just a year back,” he said in a telephone interview.

“We are waiting for a ruling on another case on Section 16 of the same law which has been used to try a number of people since its enactment,” he added.