Tribunal orders attachment of Barrick’s bank account

The Land and Housing Tribunal sitting in Tarime on October 17, 2024 issued an order to attach a bank account belonging to North Mara Gold Mine. 

This ‘garnishee order nisi’ was granted after the tribunal upheld previous court and tribunal rulings requiring Barrick Gold North Mara Mine to pay 75-year-old Tarime resident Mr. Augustino Nestory Sasi Sh100 billion as compensation.

The order states, “Whereas the above judgment debtor was ordered on September 27, 2023, by this tribunal, before the late Honorable Mahelele, to pay the decree holder the sum of Sh100 billion, the said amount has not been paid.”

In miscellaneous application No. 108 of 2023, the tribunal appointed Josina Co. Ltd. as a broker to facilitate the attachment of the mining company’s bank account under the name North Mara Gold Mine. The tribunal noted that an enforcement order had already been issued by the late Honorable Mahelele in minor application No. 108/2023.

The ruling explains, “Thus, the enforcement order dated September 27, 2023, issued by the late Honorable Mahelele is valid and remains in effect. Since the 14 days for paying the consent decree have expired, the council’s order is for Josina Company Limited to seize the account of the unsuccessful party/objector to pay the amount of Sh100 billion to the award winner.”

According to the tribunal’s chairman, Mayeye SM, it was improper and against legal procedure for the late Honorable Mahelele to receive and hear minor applications No. 35/2024 and No. 51/2024 from the objector. 

He stated, “It is a legal position that once a decision-maker, or Honorable, issues an enforcement order, they have completed their work regarding that enforcement application and are bound from overturning their enforcement order. The only court that can annul that enforcement order is the High Court.”

The saga began in 2013 when Barrick North Mara Gold Mine surveyed Sasi’s land, which included parcels with reference numbers T-03747 and T-038558. Despite the survey, the compensation owed to Sasi under government regulations was never paid. 

In 2020, Sasi received a letter from the mine’s general manager, citing delays in compensation payments without offering a clear explanation, as required under GN NO. 78/2003. The manager indicated that several others like him had also not been compensated.

Frustrated by the lack of progress, Sasi sought legal representation in 2023, a decade after his land had been acquired by Barrick North Mara Gold Mine. The matter was initially brought before the Ward Tribunal of Kemambo for mediation in May 2023. After rigorous negotiations, a substantial settlement of Sh100 billion was agreed upon by both parties.

However, the euphoria of reaching a settlement was short-lived. Barrick North Mara Gold Mine filed a revision case (No. 90/2023) in the District Land and Housing Tribunal of Tarime District a month later, seeking to overturn the agreement reached at the Ward Tribunal.

Sasi’s legal team responded with an execution case (No. 108/2023) to enforce the settlement, strongly opposing Barrick’s attempt to backtrack on their commitments. This legal arena became a battleground of paperwork and arguments, leading to subsequent objections (No. 122/2023) and counter-objections that further complicated the situation.

Amid this legal tug-of-war, tribunal decisions came and went, each carrying significant financial and reputational implications for both parties. In September 2023, the tribunal dismissed Barrick’s revision attempt (case No. 90/2023) and subsequent objections (case No. 122/2023), ordering the mine to uphold the original settlement terms.

However, Barrick escalated matters to the High Court in Musoma in October 2023, filing for revision (case No. 17/2023) and a stay of execution (case No. 83/2023). The High Court summarily dismissed both applications in November 2023, reinforcing the tribunal’s earlier rulings.

As 2023 drew to a close, Barrick sought a stay of execution through a bank guarantee application (No. 172/2023) in an effort to delay enforcement of the tribunal’s orders. Despite these efforts, the tribunal mandated Barrick to provide a substantial bank guarantee within a tight timeframe, a directive Barrick failed to comply with by the December deadline.