A former program coordinator was dismissed from her position in November 2022 due to allegations of sexual harassment.
The woman subsequently filed a lawsuit against Kituo cha Sheria, claiming unfair dismissal. The Employment and Labour Relations Court is now tasked with determining whether referring to an employee with an affectionate name that is considered suggestive constitutes sexual harassment in the workplace. The court will also decide whether the process of termination is legal.
The woman lost a request to halt the termination of her employment while awaiting the hearing and outcome of her petition, which seeks reinstatement and compensation, as well as a court order preventing the organization from hiring a replacement.
The organization claimed in court documents filed by Muma and Kanjama Advocates that a complaint was received on April 23, 2022, from a member of the programs team. The disciplinary process was initiated, resulting in the petitioner’s dismissal.
Also Read: Tanzanian Woman with 3 Husbands Faces Possible Jail Term, Advocate Says
According to the advocates, a disciplinary committee concluded that the petitioner engaged in sexual harassment of an employee under her supervision by repeatedly using the terms “baby boy” and “boy lollipop” without his consent, as well as making sexual advances that were both verbal and physical. The committee also found that the petitioner’s management style involved micro-managing staff and favoritism, creating an unhealthy work environment that affected the mental health of staff within the organization.
The board of directors adopted the committee’s findings and decided to terminate the petitioner’s employment, a decision that was implemented on November 11, 2022. The petitioner appealed the termination, but it was dismissed. In her lawsuit, the woman alleges a violation of her rights and freedoms by the organization and its executive director, Annette Mbogoh.
She claims that her dismissal was unfair because she was not given an opportunity to be heard, and the proper procedures in the organization’s human resource manual were not followed. The woman also alleges that the NGO violated her rights to fair labor practices, non-discrimination, fair administrative action, and a fair hearing as enshrined under Articles 41, 27, 47, and 50 of the Constitution.
The court rejected her request for interim orders to suspend her termination, stating that it would amount to undue interference with a decision already made by management within its discretion. The court also declined a request by the organization to strike Ms. Mbogoh’s name from the lawsuit, stating that the petitioner had demonstrated that she was a necessary party for the complete determination of the issues in dispute.
