Wadau nimepitia judgement ya dowans,aisee kumbe wanaharakati walio enda kuweka pingamizi pale High Court kupinga malipo yasifanyike sijui hawakusoma kwanza sheria inasemaje au basi tu walikua wanatest zali.na pia wanaposhinikiza tuandamane mmh hapa napo sijui wanataka nini.
kwa ufupi ni kua hata kama mkataba ulikua batili toka mwanzo wao wanaita nully and void(void abnitio)sheria za kimataifa ambazo ndo zilikua msingi wa mkataba INTERNATIONAL CHAMBER OF COMMERCE(ICC) kuna hizo RULES OF ICC on Arbitration zinautambua mkataba husika.
So the matter of being void abnitio does not hold water.
Article 6(4) of the same Rule inasema " Unless otherwise agreed,the Arbitral Tribunal Shall not cease to have jurisdiction by reasn of any claim that the contract is null and void or allegation that it is non existent that the Arbitral Tribunal upholds the validity of the arbitration agreement.The Arbitral Tribunal shall continue to have jurisdiction to determine the respective rights of the parties and to adjudicate their claims and pleas even though the contract itself may be non existent or null and void."
sasa basi kwa kifungu hicho hizo kelele za kua mkataba ni fek,oooh tuandamane ooh tupinge mmh hapo walishakubaliana kua watakua governed na the said rules,na Arbutral Tribunal itakua na mamlaka ya kuamua haki za mtu regadless mkataba ni feki.
sasa dowans si aliwapa umeme?na si mliutumia?jinsi gani alipata tenda ni immaterial apewe chake as much as amepeform.
angalizo.watanzania tuzidi kujifunza kutokana na makosa maana ndo usemi ulio wakaa kichwani.
Turudi kwenye hoja zetu za msingi tulizo zizoea za Kwa kumtizama chura kama chura je amesimama au amechuchumaa??
hizo ndo hoja zetu ambazo tunaziweza.