Legal Challenge Against Government Actions by Former Employees
In Arusha, the High Court of Tanzania has granted former employees of Tanzanite One Mining Limited and its successor, Sky Group Associates Limited, the right to file applications for judicial review against the government. This decision marks a significant development in a long-standing dispute involving job losses, unpaid wages, and alleged legal irregularities.
The applications were submitted by Jonathan Kiula, Leonard Mmbaga, Herman Kassenga, Elija Rumbe, and 466 other former employees who worked for these companies. The court’s ruling was issued on Wednesday, August 13, 2025, by Judge Dafina Daniel Ndumbaro. A copy of the decision was published on Saturday, August 16, 2025, on the TanzLII Court website, which provides free access to legal documents online.
The group of 470 employees is seeking to challenge government actions that led to the revocation of mining licenses for their former employers. Specifically, they are contesting the Ministry of Minerals and the Attorney General’s decisions to revoke the mining license ML. 490/2013 for Plot C in Mirerani, Simanjiro District, Manyara Region. This revocation placed the area under military management, resulting in significant disruptions to operations and ultimately leading to job losses.
Key Issues Raised in the Judicial Review Applications
According to application number 5784 of 2025, the revocation of the license made it impossible to enforce a labor tribunal award that required the companies to pay Sh2.52 billion in back wages. The employees argue that this action has prevented them from recovering the money they were legally entitled to.
Additionally, they intend to challenge the legality of granting Plot C to a new investor. They claim this move obstructs their ability to recover the award from assets previously owned by their employer, now under military control. Through this court approval, the employees aim to contest what they describe as a collusive partnership between the government and Sky Group, designed to transfer the plot while denying the employees their rights.
Legal Arguments Presented
Lawyer Frank Makishe, representing the applicants, stated that they are challenging administrative decisions that caused job losses and blocked the enforcement of the labor tribunal award. The dispute centers around the government revoking Tanzanite One’s mining license for Plot C, which led to employee displacement and termination.
The employees filed a claim with the Commission for Mediation and Arbitration (CMA) and were awarded Sh2.52 billion in back wages. However, enforcement has failed since the government handed the mine to a new investor. Makishe explained that the applicants worked for Tanzanite One and continued under Sky Group Associates Limited, which entered a partnership with the National Mining Corporation (Stamico). It was later discovered that Sky Group Associates Limited was not registered with the Business Registration and Licensing Agency (BRELA). Despite this, Stamico partnered with the company.
The government revoked the license due to the illegality of the partnership, but did so without considering the employment interests of the applicants. The revocation, combined with military presence and absence of the employer, has prevented the applicants from enforcing legal rights, including collecting the Sh2.52 billion award.
Furthermore, Makishe said the applicants attempted negotiations with respondents but were met with unfulfilled promises and political statements. He claimed the military presence, cited for security, has not prevented illegal mining, as shown in the 2020/2021 Controller and Auditor General (CAG) report.
Government’s Response
Representing the government, lawyer Zamaradi Nyamuryekung’e argued the applicants failed to meet legal criteria for judicial review, offering no dispute, violation, or sufficient interest justifying court intervention. While acknowledging that permission is required to file for judicial review, Nyamuryekung’e said it should be granted only if the court is satisfied there is a legitimate case.
He maintained that the revocation of the license ML. 490/2013 was legally valid under statutory procedures, including employment issues, and no fundamental rights were violated. The military presence was for security. The lawyer noted that the applicants failed to cite any specific law violated and merely elaborated on the issue. He added that their rights were protected in the CMA hearing and that they voluntarily withdrew to enforce the award, weakening the case for judicial review.
Judge’s Decision
Judge Ndumbaro said the applications were filed within the legal timeframe. “The issue for this court is whether the applicants have shown their interests were affected and there are arguable points warranting judicial review,” he said, adding: “Based on submissions from both parties, the court is satisfied that applicants’ rights and interests were affected by the administrative actions of the respondents (the Ministry of Minerals and the AG).”
The judge noted that the applicants worked in a partnership between the first respondent and Sky Group, which they claim lacked legal status. “Following revocation of the license ML. 490/2013 and military control of the mine, applicants have been unable to enforce the CMA award. Respondents have provided no legal justification for failing to address employment issues or assist in enforcement,” he said.
“Moreover, the issues raised regarding license revocation, military presence, and respondents’ failure to fulfill obligations are serious matters deserving judicial scrutiny. These are not frivolous claims.” Judge Ndumbaro approved the applications for judicial review and gave the applicants 14 days to file in court formally.
