users with the view to establish the source of prohibited content as provided under regulation 12 of the Regulations. As far as ground No. 4 is concerned, it was pointed out for the respondents that the requirement under regulation 14 of the Regulations are provided as a regulatory measure for on line content providers and users under power conferred to the 1st respondent in pursuant to sections 15 and 103 (1) of EPOCA. On ground No. 5 it was learned senior state attorney’s contention that regulation 4 (b) of the Regulations is part of the regulatory measures entrusted to the 2nd respondent by the Principal Act and further that any person aggrieved with the decision of the 2nd respondent, there is a well-established mechanism to challenge that decision. Disputing ground No. 6, learned senior state attorney for the respondents told the court that regulations 12 (f) and 12 (g) of the Regulations is clear and complemented by other laws. Further that, regulation 12 does not contravene the Constitution of the United Republic of Tanzania. Challenging ground No. 7, Mr. Ladislaus Komanya stated that by the date of the application of these Regulations a total number of 233 online content service providers had submitted their applications for registration through online website. He attached a list of the application as of 5th May, 2018. 9