expose them to the public with impunity while relying on the Prevention of Terrorism Act. The impugned provisions of the Prevention of Terrorism Act infringe and contravenes the constitution, and they target or net unintended actions, acts, conducts, people and at the detriment of the society which it purports to serve and protect." In view of the above rejoinder submission, we found appropriate to go through the Court of Appeal decision in the case of Republic v. Farid Hadi Ahmed and 21 others (supra) for purposes of drawing the necessary lesson/s, if any, pertinent to the instant petition. What we found in Farid Hadi Ahmed's case (supra) is that, the Court of Appeal after hearing the parties, decided to quash the decision of the High Court (Dar es Salaam Registry) dated 19.12.2014 in Misc. Criminal Application No. 101 of 2014 that had directed the Resident Magistrates Court of Kisutu (RM's court) to decide on matters which were raised by the respondents on 03.09.2014 in connection with three counts-conspiracy to commit an offence contrary to section 27 (c) of POTA; recruitment of persons to participate in terrorist acts contrary to section 21 (b) of that Act; and harbouring persons committing terrorist acts contrary to section 19 (a) of the same Act. The matters raised which the subordinate Court held on 01.10.2014 were that the Court had no jurisdiction to determine them as they emanated from a case triable by the High Court, including those which touched on the jurisdiction of the committing Court, lack of the mandatory consent Certificate from the Director of Public Prosecutions (the DPP) in certain instances, defects in the charge sheet for failure to disclose clear names of persons allegedly recruited and failure to disclose factual particulars in certain instances, among others. Page 24 of 37