National Security Act
Chapter 47
- Published in Tanzania Government Gazette
- Commenced on 30 March 1970
- [This is the version of this document as it was at 31 July 2002 to 14 June 2003.]
- [Note: This legislation was revised and consolidated as at 31 July 2002 and 30 November 2019 by the Attorney General's Office, in compliance with the Laws Revision Act No. 7 of 1994, the Revised Laws and Annual Revision Act (Chapter 356 (R.L.)), and the Interpretation of Laws and General Clauses Act No. 30 of 1972. All subsequent amendments have been researched and applied by Laws.Africa for TANZLII.]
1. Short title
This Act may be cited as the National Security Act.2. Interpretation
3. Espionage and sabotage
Any person who, for any purpose prejudicial to the safety or interests of the United Republic—4. Communication of certain information
5. Protection of classified information
6. Unauthorised use of uniforms, passes, etc.
7. Interfering with persons on guard at protected places
Any person who, in the vicinity of any protected place, knowingly obstructs, misleads or otherwise interferes with any person engaged on guard, sentry, patrol or other similar duty in relation to the protected place shall be guilty of an offence and liable on conviction to imprisonment for a term not exceeding ten years.8. Possession of offensive weapons or materials
9. Repealed
[Repealed by Act No. 32 of 1994 Sch.]10. Harbouring
Any person who—11. Attempts, etc.
Any person who attempts to commit any offence under this Act, or solicits or incites or endeavours to persuade another person to commit any such offence, or aids or abets or does any act preparatory to the commission of such an offence, shall be guilty of an offence and liable on conviction to the same penalties as if he had been convicted of that offence.12. Presumptions
13. Search warrants
14. Arrest without warrant
15. Duty to give information as to commission of offences
16. Authority of Director of Public Prosecutions required for prosecution
Where any person is brought before a court on a charge under this Act no further proceedings in respect thereof shall be taken against him without the consent in writing of the Director of Public Prosecutions, save such as may be necessary by remand to secure the due appearance of the person charged.17. Power to exclude public from court proceedings
Upon application in that behalf made by the prosecutor—18. Production of telegrams
19. Bail
20. Extra-territorial application of Act, and place of trial
21. Liability of officers
Where any offence under this Act is committed by a body corporate, then, as well as the body corporate, any person who, at the time of the commission of the offence, was concerned, as a director or officer, with the management of the affairs of such body corporate shall be guilty of the offence and be liable to be proceeded against and punished accordingly unless he proves to the satisfaction of the court that he had no knowledge, and could not by the exercise of reasonable diligence have had knowledge of the commission of the offence.22. Repeal of R.L. Cap. 45
[Repeals the Official Secrets Ordinance.]History of this document
31 December 2023
Revised Laws 2023
15 June 2003 amendment not yet applied
31 July 2002 this version
Revised Laws 2002
30 March 1970
Cited documents 4
Act
4|
Repealed
|
|
Repealed
|
Documents citing this one 65
Judgment
46|
High Court may grant POCA restraining and disposal orders pre‑conviction over tainted property, including property of non‑charged persons.
Proceeds of Crime Act — restraining orders — sections 38, 39, 43 and 75 POCA; disposal/sale of perishable tainted property under section 38(7) pre‑conviction; interaction with section 357 Criminal Procedure Act (restitution); restraining property interests of non‑charged persons.
|
|
High Court lacked jurisdiction to review a Registrar's bail ruling; only the Registrar (or successor) may review such a decision.
Criminal procedure – Bail – Registrar's ruling – jurisdiction to review – review of Registrar's decision lies with the Registrar or successor, not a High Court judge; Appellate Jurisdiction Act s.6(2) – D.P.P.'s right to appeal in criminal matters preserved; interlocutory decision – competence of appeal; procedural requirements for notice of appeal.
|
|
A subordinate court's trial of an economic offence without the DPP's EOCCA certificate is void for lack of jurisdiction.
* Criminal law – Economic offences – Jurisdiction – Requirement under EOCCA for a DPP’s certificate to permit a subordinate court to try offences triable by the Corruption and Economic Crimes Division of the High Court – Trial without such certificate is a nullity.
* Procedural law – Nullity – Proceedings and appellate judgments founded on jurisdictionally null trials are themselves nullities.
* Appellate jurisdiction – Revisional powers under section 4(2) AJA – Quashing convictions and setting aside sentences where trial lacked jurisdiction.
* Criminal procedure – Discretion to order retrial – Consideration of interests of justice, time served and presidential pardon.
|
|
A High Court judge lacked jurisdiction to review a Registrar’s ruling; the Court of Appeal quashed that review and allowed the D.P.P.’s appeal.
* Criminal procedure – Jurisdiction – Review of a Registrar’s ruling – Review lies with the decision-maker or successor, not an unrelated judge.
* Appellate jurisdiction – Director of Public Prosecutions – Right to appeal under s.6(2) of the Appellate Jurisdiction Act preserved despite s.5(2)(d) amendments.
* Procedural law – Competence of appeal – requirements of notice of appeal where the High Court proceedings involve multiple accused.
|
|
Reported
Evidence - Corroboration - Requirement of corroboration in sexual offences. |
|
Administrative Law – public officers – president’s powers to retire public officers in the public interest – procedure for retiring public officers in the public interest – failure by president to give reasons for retiring applicant in the public interest – validity of president’s decision – Public Service Act, cap 298 RE 2019, Section 24(1); Regulation 29(1), and Order F40 Administrative Law – judicial review – certiorari – applicant seeking to quash the president’s decision to retire him in the public interest – failure by president to give reasons for retiring applicant in the public interest – whether president’s decision was ultra vires and against the rules of natural justice |
|
Leave to appeal refused where applicant failed to show an arguable point of law or public importance.
Appellate procedure – leave to appeal – criteria for grant of leave: arguable appeal, point of law, or public importance; Confidentiality of government/stamped documents – evidential basis required to show downgraded status; Appealability – factual findings re-assessed at first instance do not ordinarily justify leave to appeal.
|
|
Appellate court expunged improperly timed caution statement and unplayed CD but upheld convictions based on other admissible evidence.
Criminal law – circumstantial evidence must exclude reasonable hypotheses of innocence; admissibility of caution statements (four-hour rule) and extra-judicial statements; electronic evidence must be read/produced in court; non-calling of a witness not necessarily fatal where other credible evidence exists.
|
|
A valid DPP certificate under s36(2) EOCCA bars bail; bail court cannot probe charge particulars when not the trial forum.
DPP certificate (s36(2) EOCCA) — validity requirements (written; safety/interest prejudice; relates to pending criminal proceedings) — effect: bars grant of bail; High Court’s limited role in bail proceedings — cannot go into charge-sheet correctness where not trial court; allegations of abuse do not displace a valid certificate in bail application.
|
|
A valid DPP certificate under s.36(2) EOCCA bars the applicant from obtaining bail pending trial.
* Criminal procedure – Bail – Effect of Director of Public Prosecutions’ certificate under section 36(2) EOCCA – A valid certificate precludes grant of bail.
* Jurisdiction – High Court’s powers in bail applications – Trial court must determine charge sufficiency; bail courts should not examine particulars prior to committal.
* Prosecutorial discretion – Allegations of abuse do not negate a statute‑valid DPP certificate absent a successful challenge to its validity.
|
Act
6Government Notice
6Gazette
2Ordinance
2Law Reform Report
1Subsidiary legislation
|
Title
|
|
|---|---|
| Government Notice 169 of 1973 | |
| Government Notice 161 of 1973 | |
| Government Notice 159 of 1970 | |
| Government Notice 133 of 1970 | |
| Government Notice 132 of 1970 |