Agreement to pay below minimum wage

We are investing in the hospitality industry and most of our tourists come from Eastern Europe, especially Russia and Ukraine. We have started experiencing a decline in the number of tourists coming from those countries due to the war between them. We anticipate that if this war continues, our business will be seriously hit and we might be forced to either reduce the wage rates we are currently offering to our employees or retrench some of them in order to survive. We would like to know if the law allows us to negotiate with the employees or the trade union and agree to reduce the wage rate below the prescribed minimum rates if we are getting zero revenue.
KL, Bagamoyo 

The current minimum wage for different sectors is fixed by the Labour Institutions Wage Order, 2013. The minimum amount of wage payable to an employee working in a tourist hotel as specified in the Second Schedule to the Order is TZS 250,000 per month. The employer may pay the employee above the prescribed minimum wage. However it is contrary to order 4(3) of the Order to pay an employee wage below the minimum rate prescribed by the Order.

Bargaining with the employees or the trade union is authorised only if the intention of the bargaining is to improve the wage rate prescribed in the Order and not to reduce the wage below the statutory rate. Section 41 of the Labour Institutions Act [Cap.300 R.E 2019] clearly stipulates that the wage rates prescribed in the Second Schedule to the Wage Order are binding on the employees and the employers. Therefore the employer and the employees or the employer and a trade union cannot agree to reduce the salary below the statutory minimum amount prescribed in the Wage Order regardless of the fact that the employer is getting zero revenue.

To show how seriously the prescribed wage rates are treated, although the Wage Order is a subsidiary legislation, section 41(2) of the Labour Institutions Act makes the Wage Order superior to the employment standards provided under the Employment and Labour Relations Act [Cap.366 R.E 2019] which is an Act of Parliament. The Wage Order is treated as superior to the Employment and Labour Relations Act because it is assumed it reflects the current cost of living compared to the Employment and Labour Relations Act that takes a long time to be reviewed.

Moreover, an employee who claims to have been paid below the statutory minimum rate can file a suit in the District Court or Resident Magistrate Court under section 41(3) of the Labour Institutions Act to recover the amount underpaid by the employer.

Selling liquor and having a boutique in same premises

I own a bar licensed to sell intoxicating liquors and use the same premises for my boutique. I have been served with a letter by the Municipal Authority requiring me to close down the business of boutique for the reason that it is not allowed to have a boutique in the same premises licenced to intoxicating liquors. Is this the law or just the desire of the Municipal Authority? Please guide me. 
TW, Morogoro

It is the law and the Municipal Authority is right. Section 67(1) of the Intoxicating Liquors Act [Cap.77 R.E 2002] prohibits the use of premises licensed for bars for other businesses other than the businesses connected with the hotel e.g. restaurant, selling tobacco etc unless the seller obtains a prior written consent of the Municipal Authority. In the absence of prior written consent from the Municipal Authority, it is illegal to run both a bar and boutique in the same premises.

Punishment of money laundering in plea agreement

Our company and its director are under criminal investigation for the offence of money laundering. We would like to know what the punishment will be in case the company and the director decide to enter into a plea bargaining with the prosecution. Is there any minimum penalty which the Court is bound to impose irrespective of the plea agreement? 
DM, Dar

Fine sentence for the offence of money laundering prescribed under section 12(1) of the Anti- Money Laundering Act [Cap. 423 R.E 2019] for an individual offender ranges between TZS 100 million and 500 million. In default to pay the fine, the Court can sentence the individual offender to imprisonment ranging between 5 and 10 years. The penalty for a corporate offender ranges between TZS 500 million and 1 billion or the Court may order the corporate offender to pay three times the value of the property involved. However, it should be borne in mind that money laundering is listed in the First Schedule to the Economic and Organised Crimes Control Act [Cap.200 R.E 2019] as an economic offence. Minimum sentence of all the offences prescribed under section 60(2) of the EOCCA is 20 years imprisonment irrespective of the gravity of the offence and the maximum is 30 years imprisonment if the crime is proved to have been committed in an organised manner.

Where the offender is convicted on his own plea of guilty in a plea agreement, section 194D(6) of the Criminal Procedure Act [Cap. 20 R.E 2019] as amended by Act No.1 of 2022 gives the accused and the prosecution power to agree on the sentence to be imposed and the Court is bound to impose the sentence agreed by the parties in case the plea agreement is recorded by the Court. Prior to the amendment of section 194D of the Criminal Procedure Act, the sentencing procedure following the conviction founded on a plea agreement was governed by the Criminal Procedure (Plea Bargaining Agreement) Rules, 2021. Rule 21 gave the accused and the prosecution privilege to recommend the sentence to be imposed on a conviction founded on plea agreement but the final determination of the sentence is made by the Court.

However, now that the Criminal Procedure Act gives power to the parties to bargain even the sentence, the final determination of the sentence lies with the parties and not the Court. Since rule 21(1) of the Plea Bargaining Rules and section 194D (6) Criminal Procedure Act are at a variance, the Act that vests the parties with power to determine the sentence prevails over the Rules that vests the Court with power to assess the sentence.