Q&A – 5 August 2019
Military uniforms worn on the street
Many a times when we are travelling the highways you see personal wearing army or police uniforms but they are actually highway robbers. What are the consequences of wearing such a uniform? What about the fake seals we see of government departments especially on local purchase orders to cheat traders to supply goods. How serious are these offences?
TY, Morogoro
Section 6 of the National Security Act covers both these and states that (1) Any person who, for the purpose of gaining or assisting any other person to gain admission to a protected place or for any other purpose prejudicial to the safety or interests of the United Republic– (a) without lawful authority uses or wears any uniform of the Defence Forces or of the Police Force or any other official uniform of the United Republic or any uniform so closely resembling the same as to be likely to deceive, or falsely represents himself to be a person who is or has been entitled to wear or use any such uniform; or (f) any person who without lawful authority uses or has in his possession or under his control any die, seal or stamp of or belonging to or used, made or provided by any Government department, a specified authority or any diplomatic, naval, army or air force authority appointed by or acting under the authority of the Government, or any die, seal or stamp so closely resembling any such die, seal or stamp as aforesaid as to be likely to deceive, or counterfeits any such die, seal or stamp or uses or has in his possession or under his control any such counterfeit die, seal or stamp, commits an offence and shall be liable on conviction to imprisonment for a term not exceeding twenty years.
The above answers both your questions. Anyone found wearing an army or police uniform, or with a seal of any government department can be sentenced to upto 20 years in prison.
Police interview time limit
I was taken in for police interview and spent the entire day there from 9am to 7pm, and then admitted to bail after having to plead with the officer that I did not want to be held in custody as it was a minor bailable offence which i was denying in any case. I was told that the police in charge who could allow bail was attending a function but I finally managed to get hold of him and get bail. My question is on how long can an officer interview me because by the end of the interview I was extremely tired and stressed. The officer kept on asking the same question over and over again, slowly writing on his notepad. Is there no time limit under the law?
CC, Moshi
The Criminal Procedure Act has provided under section 50 that (1) for the purpose of this Act, the period available for interviewing a person who is in restraint in respect of an offence is– (a) subject to paragraph (b), the basic period available for interviewing the person, that is to say, the period of four hours commencing at the time when he was taken under restraint in respect of the offence.
Paragraph (b) in principle excludes time when you are waiting for your lawyer, or the time when you are not being interviewed. However, the basic time frame for the interview is 4 hours, which however can be extended to another four hours as provided under section 51.
Section 51 states that (1) where a person is in lawful custody in respect of an offence during the basic period available for interviewing a person, but has not been charged with the offence, and it appears to the police officer in charge of investigating the offence, for reasonable cause, that it is necessary that the person be further interviewed, he may– (a) extend the interview for a period not exceeding eight hours and inform the person concerned accordingly; or (b) either before the expiration of the original period or that of the extended period, make application to a magistrate for a further extension of that period. (2) A police officer shall not frivolously or vexatiously extend the basic period available for interviewing a person, but any person in respect of whose interview the basic period is extended pursuant to paragraph (a) of subsection (1), may petition for damages or compensation against frivolous or vexatious extension of the basic period, the burden of proof of which shall lie upon him.
Immunity and prosecution of MPs
I have seen many Members of Parliament being prosecuted in Courts of law. Is that legal? Do they now have immunity like in other countries? It is tantamount to prosecuting a judge is it not?
TY, Dar
Generally speaking, a MP cannot be prosecuted for any opinion in the National Assembly. Article 100 of our Constitution provides that protection and states that (1) There shall be freedom of opinion, debate and that freedom shall not be breached or questioned by any organ in the United Republic or in any Court or elsewhere outside the National Assembly. (2) Subject to this Constitution or to the provisions of any other relevant law, a Member of Parliament shall not be prosecuted and no civil proceedings may be instituted against him in a Court in relation to any thing which he has said or done in the National Assembly or has submitted to the National Assembly by way of a petition, bill, motion or otherwise.
This immunity is limited to that in the National Assembly. Hence a MP can be questioned by police and taken to Court for anything that is not as a result of the MPs freedom of expression in the National Assembly. For example a MP can be charged with a traffic offence or any other criminal charge under the Penal Code. There is no absolute immunity that a MP enjoys the way the President enjoys under Article 46 which states that during the President’s tenure of office in accordance with this Constitution it shall be prohibited to institute or continue in Court any criminal proceedings whatsoever against him.
We believe that in other countries, the MPs do not enjoy immunity outside of their parliament for actions that are not related to their opinions and actions in parliament.