Online Reporter
Trust Maanda
Legal Position
THE rules of natural justice are fundamental legal principles which are meant to ensure fairness, equity, and procedural due process in decision-making.
These rules, are essential safeguards against arbitrary actions by courts or administrative bodies.
They are meant to ensure that there is procedural fairness in any court or disciplinary proceedings. If followed, they ensure that the decision is sound and substantively fair.
One of the rules is the rule against bias (Nemo Judex in sua Causa). This rule translates to “no one should be a judge in their own cause.”
It requires that any person or body making a decision must be impartial, unbiased, and independent and not favour any party to the dispute.
One cannot be a judge in his own cause means that for the decision maker to be impartial, he or she must not have an interest in the matter.
Automatic disqualification: If you have a direct personal, financial, or pecuniary interest in the outcome, you are barred from judging it. Even the appearance of bias can be enough to invalidate a decision.
The rule applies to non-financial bias — like personal relationships, prior involvement, or a strong stake in the result. Where you see it:
A hearing officer must recuse themselves if they are a party, a witness, or have a conflict. It is about protecting fairness more than actual fairness. The process itself has to look unbiased for public confidence.
That impartiality means that the decision-makers must not have any personal, financial, or official interest in the outcome of the case. Where there is any of those interests, the decision maker must resign from the case. He or she must recuse themselves.
There must be no perception of bias. The decision maker may not be biased, but if there is a perception that he or she is, they must remove themselves from hearing the case.
This is so because justice must, not only be done, but must be seen to be done. Even a reasonable suspicion or real likelihood of bias is enough to disqualify the decision maker and invalidate their decision.
The other rule is the right to a fair hearing known as the Audi Alteram Partem rule.
This Latin maxim means “hear the other side too.” It means you must not hear just one side. You must not hear just one party. Hear the other side as well.
It guarantees that any person who may be adversely affected by a decision must be given a genuine opportunity to present their case.
This rule is as old as Eden. God gave Adam and Eve an opportunity to be heard before He punished them.
This rule requires that the affected individual be given adequate notice. The affected individual must receive timely and precise notice of the allegations or charges against them. There must be full disclosure of the charge and allegations.
To make meaningful representations, individuals must be informed of the evidence and facts raised against them. The allegations against him or her must be clearly spelt out.
He or she must be then given an opportunity to respond.
He or she must be given a fair chance to defend themselves, present evidence, and question opposing claims.
This includes getting prior notice of the hearing with adequate time to prepare their defence or consult their legal representative.
These principles apply universally across judicial proceedings, administrative tribunals, and workplace disciplinary hearings. The exact format of a hearing can vary. Some hearings may be based on written or oral submissions, depending on the requirements of the case. In either case, the underlying demand for procedural and substantive fairness remains mandatory.
If an affected party does not attend the hearing or submit his or her written defence, the hearing can proceed without them as long as they have been given adequate notice.
If he or she walks out on the hearing, that amounts to a waiver of the right to the audi alteram partem rule.
If the hearing proceeds without the affected party, under the circumstances, the rule would not have been breached.
These rules of natural justice are now part of the Zimbabwe constitution, in matters of administrative justice. An administrative officer has to follow the rules of natural justice in making an administrative decision. Every person has a right to a just, fair and prompt and fair administrative decision.
In the end, a decision may be wrong, not because it is simply not correct, but because it is not procedurally arrived at. In order to avoid this, rules of natural justice must be followed.
TRUST MAANDA is a legal practitioner and a partner at Maunga Maanda And Associates. He writes in his personal capacity. He can be contacted on +263772432646
