Adminstrative Law

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW
Administrative law is the law that governs those who administer any part of government
activities. In other words, this law is concerned with the powers and procedures for the use of
those powers by public officials and institutions responsible for the performance of the
functions of the state. The law mainly focuses on power vested in the government institutions
and how there are used.
It must be understood that the government has a duty to provide many services citizens
depends on for them to have a meaningful livelihood. As the government endeavour to
provide such services, citizens interact with state agencies or institutions on a daily basis and
as they interact and as the state executes its functions, it exercises discretion powers and the
public in assured of fair and responsive administrative system, failure to which will have a
detriment effect on the welfare of the people in exercise of discretion powers, decisions are
made. There is a standard which administrative authorities must follow in deciding matters
which may have civil consequences, and these standards are referred to as Rules Of Natural
Justice.
Rules of Natural Justice.
Historically, obligations of natural justice were owned only in courts and other very formal
legal proceedings. And today, the specific procedures to be followed to ensure the principles
of natural justice are upheld in court are set out in details with written laws. However, it is
how recognized that the broader concept of procedural and administrative farness can give
rise to less extensive procedural rights in others, less formalized types of decision making.
Rules of natural justice implies fairness reasonableness and equity.
There are two principles of natural justice which every administrative officials or agency
must follow in taking any decision which may adversely affect the rights of a private
individual or group and there are as follows;
1) Audi alteram partem- hear both sides
2) Nemo judex in causa sua-No one must be a judge in his own case
Audi alteram Partem

This is a latin maxim which means hear both sides or let other side be heard as well. The
principle also means that no must be condemned unheard. This gives rise to a duty to act
fairly, to listen to arguments and to reach a decision which must be doubtful of truthfulness.
The constitution further under Article 18 makes safe guards for the rules of natural justice.
Sub Article (1) provides that;( if any person is charged with a criminal offence, then unless
the charge is withdrawn), the case shall be afforded a fair hearing within a reasonable time by
an independent and impartial court established by law.
From the above quotation from the constitution, it can be concluded that our supreme law
embraces the concept of impartiality and independence of courts which are fundamental
elements of rules of natural justice. Further, article 18(2) provides that; for every person
charged with a criminal offence shall be informed as soon as practicable in the language he
understands in details of the nature of the offence charged. The same article further provides
that such a person shall be given adequate time and facilities for the preparation of his
defence. In the case of Kang’ombe v Attorney General (1973 SCZ 7) in which a letter
which highly incriminated Kang’ombe was not exposed to him.
The brief facts of the case were that Kang’ombe was a teacher under the teaching service
commission which had the power to appoint, confirm and discipline any member of the
teaching profession. The permanent secretary in the ministry of education recommended the
dismissal of Kang’ombe but the commission declined to dismiss him as it had found him with
no case to answer. However, Kang’ombe was dismissed after the secretary general of the
government recommended his dismissal to the president. The court held that the appellant
was improperly dismissed as he was not heard.
Further in R V Board of Visitors of Hull Prison,ex parte St Germain ( No.2) C. A 1979)
Where the court ruled that prisoner’s right to fairness has been breached by an administrative
agency’s reliance on hearsay evidence without giving the prisoner the opportunity to respond
to that evidence.
In R V Chancellor of University of Cambridge (1723) Fortesque J said (even God did not
pass sentence upon Adam before he was called upon to give his defence)
Nemo Judex in Causa sua (rule against bias)
This equally latin maxim which entails that no one must be a judge in his own case. It is
actually a rule against bias. This rule emphatically denotes that a person with an interest in a
matter that may incapacitate his or her ability to make a fair decision must not sit as a judge
in a matter, It doesn’t matter whether such a judge has a good reputation as long as he has an
interest in the matter before the court, he would have acted against this rule.
In the case of Mwenya V The people (1973,ZLR 261), it was held that it is not necessary to
prove the actual bias but it will suffice to show that one of the parties to a case might have
reasonably formed the impression that the judge was incapacitated in his ability to give the
case an unbiased hearing. The brief of the facts were that Mwenya was charged with official
corruption. He was convicted of obtaining money by false pretence. A plea had been made to
the amended charge, but the appellant was not asked if he wishes to cross examine the
witnesses who had given evidence nor was he asked if he required an adjournment to meet
the knew charge. The magistrate in that case had taken it upon him self to direct investigation
into a criminal matter and to have the results of the investigation reported to him and then
finally heard the case. That was to be held to be a clear violation of the rules of natural justice
as there was a likely hood of bias.
Lord Denning in Metropolitan properties v Lannon (1969) 1 577 stated that;( in
considering whether there was a real likelihood of bias, the court does not look at the mind of
the justice himself or what ever it may be who sit in a judicial capacity, but this court looks at
the impression which would be given to other people. Even if he was an impartial as he could
be, nevertheless if right minded person would think that in the circumstance there was a real
likelihood bias on his part, then he should not sit).

Adminstrative Law

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Adminstrative Law

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Adminstrative Law

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

ADMINISTRATIVE LAW

Rules of Natural Justice.

Audi alteram Partem

Nemo Judex in Causa sua (rule against bias)

You might also like