Pandemonium almost broke out on Tuesday, April 13th 2010, at the High Court, when Judge Mwaikugile was presiding over a case that had been brought to him by one of the two groups claiming to be representing retirees of the defunct East African Community, EAC.
It all started when a group of six led by one, Mr Mlaki had tendered an application before Judge Mwaikugile seeking the execution of a decree on case no. 95/2003 that dwells on claims that the government underpaid the retirees when it paid them their terminal benefits in 2005.
The execution of the decree was supposed to have been conducted in secrecy without the knowledge of the seven bona fide retirees’ representatives led by plaintiff number one, Mr Ernest Karatta and plaintiff number seven, Mr Ahmed Kabunga.
However, the move leaked to the seven plaintiffs who have since 2003 been represented by advocates Mr Lukwaro, Mr Byamungu and DMK Bishota. The latter is however, presently indisposed.
The leakage on the secret move had led, on the material day, to the appearance in the High Court of both parties along with their advocates.
The presence in the court of advocates from both parties forced the judge to seek clarification on the legality of the legal counsels on the material case.
The seven plaintiffs told the judge through their counsel, Mr Lukwaro that they were the bona fide representatives of the EAC retirees and that they were not only recognized legally, but they were also recognized by the High Court and the debtor, the government of the United Republic of Tanzania.
Mr Lukwaro further told the judge that the legality of the group he was representing in the court lay in the fact that it had also signed the Deed of Settlement that facilitated the payment to the retirees of their now disputed terminal benefits in 2005.
The advocate for the group of six, Mr Pius Chabruma admitted before Judge Mwaikugile that it was true that the seven plaintiffs led by advocate Lukwaro had since the start of the case in 2003 been the bona fide representatives of the EAC retirees.
He however, said that as one of the retirees himself, he had been appointed by the Mlaki’s group to help after the group had differed with Kabunga’s group over what he claimed to be its delay in executing the all-important decree.
After listening to both parties, Judge Mwaikugile asked Mr Chabruma if the case they now sought execution from the High Court had previously been heard and ruling on it made.
Mr Chabruma admitted that the case had neither been heard nor had any ruling on it made.
“If the case has never been heard and ruling on it been made, how have you as an advocate submitted to the High Court an application seeking execution of the decree without adhering to court procedures,” the Judge asked Chabruma.
However, when the advocate to give a satisfactory answer, the Judge told Chabruma that he was misleading his clients through his failure to explain to them, and transparently, the court’s laws and procedures guiding demands that had been submitted before the court.
He then ordered the two parties to sit together and resolve, amicably, the differences that had cropped up between and among them and return to the court on Friday, April 30th 2010.
He called on the two parties to use wisdom in bringing about reconciliation between them for the benefit of all the EAC retirees instead of continuing to abet the tug-of-war between them which he said was doing more harm than good to them.
Unfortunately instead of working towards what the judge had counseled them, Mlaki’s group that had positioned itself outside the court vowed to deal with the seven plaintiffs physically!
The High Court’s premises was all of sudden transformed into an arena for show of strengths as members of Mlaki’s group for three hours moved menacingly from one end to the other as they challenged the seven plaintiffs to come out of the court chambers and face ‘music’.
The foregoing conduct on the part of the Mlaki’s group caused a lot of anxiety at the court forcing proceedings to be suspended.
Meanwhile the threats against the seven plaintiffs forced authority at the High Court to provide the group inside the court chambers with security as Mlaki’s group refused to leave the court premises.
The police later took out the seven plaintiffs from the High Court through the back door and drove them to the Central Police station.
However, Mlaki’s group somehow came to learn of their departure. They later also went to the Central Police Station where they continued with their fracas.
At that point, the Dar es Salaam Regional Police Commander, Suleiman Kova talked Mlaki into calming down his group.
He cautioned him that their continued unruly conduct at the police station was likely to disrupt peace.
Finally the group melted away, giving the seven plaintiffs the opportunity of leaving the police station for their respective homes.
However, one thing is crystal clear. The EAC retirees’ rightful quest for their terminal benefit had, through Mlaki’s group conduct both at the High Court and the Central Police Station, soiled the EAC retirees’ quest for their rightful terminal benefits.
KABUNGA’S STATEMENT
Mr Kabunga told the website in an interview recently that they will continue to seek their rights from the government until the issue of underpayment is addressed.
He said from the start the government had not involved them in the issue pertaining to how much the government owed each retiree in terms of his or her terminal benefits.
He said since the government had elected not to be transparent in the whole issue, it had now no alternative but to listen and solve the problem once and for all.
He said what they wanted from the government was to ensure that their terminal benefit was pegged on two things: real value (in accordance with the present value) and the seven percent compound interest.
Meanwhile, ruling on the case could not be made by Judge Mwaikugile on Friday, April 30th as had been agreed as on the material day the judge lost his father.
As we went to the press, the date for the ruling had been postponed to May 5th 2010.
Whatever happens on the case, the EAC retirees’ question over payment of their terminal benefits which has dragged on for 33 years has left an irreparable damage on the government’s image locally and internationally.
The seriousness over the government’s failure to honour its obligations to the EAC retirees for over three decades casts doubts over the entire process it is presently involved in on the regional path towards federation.
The proverbial million dollar question is if it has failed to settle once and for terminal benefits for the retirees of the defunct EAC how is the same government going to respect benefits of the Tanzanian employees in the new EAC?
Equally important to delve into is the conduct of former senior government officials, on the entire issue, such as Mr Mramba and Mr Mgonja.
Pertinent questions ought to be posed to the foregoing senior government officials.
They owe the nation explanation as to why they behaved the way they behaved.
What was their main motives behind doubling of the number of retirees from 15,000 to 31,000?
What is interesting about the government’s figure on the number of EAC retirees is that even on the latest document dated April 21st 2010 issued by the seven plaintiffs, it refers the number of retirees entitled to terminal benefits as being around 17,000 as opposed to 31,000.
As to the group led by Mr Mlaki, the group of seven led by Mr Karatta and Mr Kabunga were spot on when they said that conflict within the retirees was likely to give the government an opportunity to continue denying them their right of being paid fully their terminal benefits.
Indeed, if the government dilly dallied on the issue for over three decades, what would stop it from making use of a crack in the retirees’ leadership by continuing to postpone the retirees’ payment of their rightful terminal benefits?
By Attilio Tagalile
No comments:
Post a Comment