THE AFRICAN JOURNAL OF FINANCE AND MANAGEMENT - VOLUME 24 NOS.

1& 2, 2015:1-17

The Banking Confidentiality Law in Tanzania:

An Appraisal

Eugene E. Mniwasa*

Abstract
The banker’s duty of confidentiality to its customers, which is founded on the contract between banks
and their customers, is one of the pillars governing the banker-customer relationship in Tanzania. The
banks have the obligation to keep information concerning their customers’ affairs confidential. The law
permits the duty of confidentiality to be lifted in certain specific situations including where information
related to customers’ transactions is required to prevent or control unlawful activities such as money
laundering, terrorism, drug trafficking and corruption or to facilitate the conduct of legal proceedings in
courts. This article argues that the legal compulsion to disclose affairs of a bank customer in Tanzania
is moving to the direction that undermines banking confidentiality. There is a need for the government
of Tanzania to reform the law in order to establish a legal framework that strikes a balance between the
need to protect legitimate interests of customers of banks and the necessity to fight against or curb
unlawful activities committed through the use of banks.

1. Introduction *
affairs of their customers to authorities to
The banker-customer relationship is
facilitate the detection and control of certain
contractual in nature (Mthembu, 2010). This
designated crimes. The authorities may require
relationship grants rights to and imposes duties
banks to disclose confidential information
on the bank and the customer (Muhammad,
about transactions involving their customers’
2015). The banker’s duties include the
accounts through which money believed to
obligation to keep information regarding
have been acquired from unlawful activities
affairs of its customers confidential (Mugarura,
such as corruption, trading in narcotic drugs,
2015). There are several situations where
trafficking of persons and other crimes is
banks are be compelled to disclose information
transacted. Such authorities may also require
about the affairs of their customers. One of
banks to disclose information relating to the
such situations is where the law requires banks
location of funds that might be derived from,
to make disclosure (Filder, 2006).
or used for, the commission of terrorist acts
(Mandopi, 2010a, 2010b; Kapinga, 2010;
Banks in Tanzania are increasingly under a
Longopa, 2015).
legal compulsion to disclose affairs of their
customers. This obligation has come up as a
This article examines succinctly the law on a
response to the increase in the incidences of banker’s duty of confidentiality to its
financial crimes such as money laundering and customers. It looks into the law as provided for
its predicate crimes over the recent past in the statutory law of Tanzania, and illustrated
(Mniwasa, 2015). Laws have been put in place through the common law of England which
to require banks to disclose information about forms part of the laws of Tanzania.1 The article

1
The English received the law consisting of the common
*Instituteof Finance Management, Dar es Salaam, law, doctrines of equity and the statutes of general
Tanzania: mniwasa@ifm.ac.tz; mniwasa@gmail.com application in force in England on the twenty-second day

AJ FM 24(1&2), January – December 2015

Eugene E. Mniwasa
builds on some literature from Tanzania and
takes a look at some comments regarding the
banking confidentiality law from other
jurisdictions. The remainder of the article is
structured as follows. Section two describes
briefly the banker-customer relationship.
Section three conceptualises a bank’s duty of
confidentiality to its customers, while section
four describes some situations where banks are
compelled to disclose information concerning
affairs of their customers. Section five points
out some limitations of the banking
confidentiality law in Tanzania. Section six
presents concluding remarks and gives
recommendations.
2. The Banker-Customer Relationship
In Tanzania, several statutes have defined the
term ‘bank’.2 Based on the statutory
definitions, a bank can be described as a
person or institution that carries out the “...
business of banking.”
Section 3 of the Banking and Financial
Institutions Act 20063 and Section 3 of the
Bank of Tanzania Act 20064 provide that a “...
of July, 1920 is applicable to Tanzania by virtue of Section
2 (3) of the Judicature and Application of the Laws Act
Chapter 358 (RE 2002).The English law is applicable in
Tanzania except in circumstances where the common
law, doctrines of equity and statutes of general application
have been modified, amended or replaced by other
provision made under the authority of any Order of Her
Majesty in Council, or by any Proclamation issued, or any
Act or Acts passed in and for Tanzania, or has been
modified, amended or replaced by other provision made
under any Act or Acts of the Parliament of Tanzania.
Also, the English law shall be in force only so far as the
circumstances of Tanzania and its inhabitants permit and
subject to such qualifications as local circumstances may
render necessary.
2
Section 2 of the Bills of Exchange Act Chapter 215 (RE
2002) defines a bank as a body of persons, corporate or
unincorporated that “... carries on the business of
banking.” Section 3 of the Banking and Financial
Institutions Act 2006 and Section 3 of the Bank of
Tanzania Act 2006 define a bank as “... an entity that is
engaged in the banking business.” Section 76 of the
Evidence Act 1967 Chapter 6 (RE 2002) defines a bank as
“... a person carrying on the business of banking in the
United Republic of Tanzania.”
3
Chapter 342.
4 10
Chapter 197.
2| AJ FM 24(1&2), January - December 2015
banking business comprises the business of
receiving funds from costumers through
acceptance of money deposits payable on
demand or after a fixed period or notice; the
use of such funds for loans or investments; and
any other activities recognised as customary
banking practice which banks may be
authorised to do.”5
In Copland v. Davies6 the Court stated that a
bank carries on the business of receiving
people’s money and giving them receipts,
acknowledging receipt of money and issuing
passbooks and cheques and dealing with them
in ordinary way of a banker. In Joachimson v.
Swiss Bank Corporation7 the Court stated a bank
undertakes to receive money, and collects bills
for its customer’s account. The proceeds so
received are not held in trust for the customer,
but the bank borrows the proceeds and
undertakes to repay them.
The statutory law in Tanzania does not define
the term ‘customer of a bank’. It is important
to look at how the English common law has
described this term.
In Great Western Railway Co. v. London & County
Banking Company Limited8 the Court stated that
a person is not a customer of a bank unless
s/he has “... some sort of an account, either a
deposit or current account or similar relation”9
with the bank. In Taxation Commissioners v.
English, Scottish and Australian Bank Limited10 a
bank customer was described as “... a person
whose money has been accepted by a bank on
the footing that [the bank] undertakes to
honour cheques up to the amount standing to
5
The ‘banking business’ is not limited to the business of
banks receiving from depositors and paying money from
the customers’ accounts. Banks provide various services
to persons some of whom are not depositors. See Section
24 of the Banking and Financial Institutions Act.
6
(1872) LR 5 HL 358.
7
[1921] 3 KB 110.
8
(1901) AC 414.
9
Ibid at p 420. The Court expressed a similar view in United
Dominions Trust vs. Kirkwood [1966] 2 QB 431.
(1920) AC 683.
 The Banking Confidentiality Law in Tanzania: An Appraisal
his observes credit….’11 From the above case
law, a customer of a bank is a person who has
opened an account with a bank. In Ladbroke &
Co. v. Todd12 the Court held that the banker-
customer relationship begins as soon as money
or a cheque is paid in, and the bank accepts it
and is prepared to open an account. A customer
includes a person who has intention to open a
bank account and subsequently opens such an
account.
Besides accepting deposits from customers,
banks provide different types of services
(Glover, 1995; Muhammad, 2015). As pointed
out above, in Tanzania the Banking and
Financial Institutions Act permits banks to
provide a wide range of services to their
customers. Therefore, in a broader view, a
customer means any person who transacts with
a banker in matters that involve the banking
business (Varshney et al., 2005).
3. Banker’s Duty of Confidentiality to
Customers
A bank and its customer have rights and duties
towards each other. The rights and duties are
expressed in the agreement between the parties
and implied in the contract by the law and
trade customs and usages.13 The bank has the
duty, among others, to maintain
confidentiality with regard to information
about affairs of its customer (Latimer, 2005;
Mthembu, 2010; Muhammad, 2015). The
duty is for the bank to protect its customers’
information and to keep the financial
information private and secure (Masete, 2012;
Young, 2013; Schulze, 2015). The Court in Re
Diplock14 stated that the bank is required not to
“... disclose to third parties either the state of
11
At p 687.
12
(1914) 30 TLR 433.
13
Rights and duties of a bank and a customer have been
described in many cases including London Joint Stock Bank
v. Macmillan & Arthur (1918) AC 771, Joachimson v. Swiss
Bank Corporation (1921) 3 KB 111, Robinson v. Midland
Bank Limited (1925) 41 TLR 402, Slingsby & Others v. District
Bank Ltd (1932) 1 KB 544 and Lumsden & Co. v. London
Trustee Savings Bank (1971) 1 Llyod’s Rep.114.
14
[1947] 1 Ch. 7 at p.746.
customer’s account or any of his transactions
with the bank or information relating to
customers acquired through maintenance and
administration of the account.”15 This duty
extends to all transactions that go through a
customer’s account and all information a bank
has about its customer (Ellinger et al., 2002,
Financial Ombudsman Service, 2005;
Mugarura, 2015).
In Tanzania, the Banking and Financial
Institutions Act provides for the bank’s duty of
confidentiality to its customers. Section 48 (1)
of the Act provides that a bank shall not
disclose “... information relating to its
customers or their affairs except in
circumstances in which ... it is necessary or
appropriate for the bank… to [reveal such]
information.” The Act provides also that
before assuming his/her position and
discharging his/her duties, a director, a
member of a committee, an auditor, an
advisor, a manager, an officer or an employee
of a bank shall make a written declaration of
fidelity. The Chief Executive Officer or the
Secretary of a bank shall witness the signing of
the declaration made by the above officials.16
Certain provisions of the law require the Bank
of Tanzania (BoT) to observe the banking
confidentiality principle. The BoT owes the
duty of confidentiality towards its customers.17
Section 16 of the Bank of Tanzania Act
provides that, except for the purposes of the
performance of his or her functions, when so
15
See also the dictum of Atkin L.J in Tournier’s case (note
22).
16
Section 48 (2).
17
Sections 31, 32 and 38 of the Bank of Tanzania Act
provide that the BoT is a bank of the governments, public
authorities, commercial banks and financial institutions in
Tanzania. Additionally, Section 56 (1) of the Bank of
Tanzania provides that the BoT may open accounts for,
accept deposit from, and collect money for and on
account of, foreign central banks, foreign banks and
foreign financial institutions and may generally act as
banker to such banks and institutions.
AJ FM 24(1&2), January – December 2015| 3
Eugene E. Mniwasa
required by law or authorised by the Board of
the BoT, “... no member of the Board or staff
of the Bank [of Tanzania] shall disclose any
information relating to the Bank or to any
transaction or customer of the Bank acquired
in the course of employment or the discharge
of his duties.” Moreover, the Banking and
Financial Institutions Act requires the BoT to
observe confidentiality with regard to
information about customers’ affairs acquired
from commercial banks during the central
bank’s exercise of its supervisory functions.
The Act provides that the BoT shall not
disclose to any person: (i) any information
concerning affairs of a customer of a bank
obtained in the exercise of its regulatory and
supervisory functions; or (ii) a record
contained in or related to a report of
examination or other confidential supervisory
information prepared by, on behalf of, or for
the use of the Bank or any other agency that
regulates or supervises banks or financial
institutions.18 The BoT may publish whole or
part of information furnished by a
commercial bank, but the information so
published shall not disclose the financial
affairs of a bank’s customer unless a written
consent of the customer has first been
obtained by the BoT.19
Since some principles of banking law (including
the banker’s duty of confidentiality to the
customer applied to most Commonwealth
countries20including Tanzania) trace their origin
from the English common law, it is imperative
to look at some decisions of courts in England
that have applied or made reference to the
banking confidentiality principle. The common
law on the banker’s duty of confidentiality to
the customer, which has evolved for many
18
Section 48 (4).
19
Ibid., Section 32 (2).
20
The Commonwealth countries are independent and
sovereign states many of which are former colonies and
dependences of Britain.
4| AJ FM 24(1&2), January - December 2015
years,21 was expounded in the landmark case of
Tournier v. National Provincial & Union Bank of
England (Tournier’s case).22 The Court of Appeal
of England stated that it is an implied term of
the contract between a banker with a customer
that a banker shall not disclose information
about a customer’s account or transactions
related thereto of his customer, except in certain
circumstances. The Court also stated that a
banker’s duty of confidentiality is not confined
to information about the “... actual state of
account of the customer” but include “... any
information derived from the account itself” as
well as “... transactions [that were conducted]
through the account.”23 The Court pointed out
further that the banking confidentiality is not
absolute but subject to exceptions, and the
qualifications under which a bank can make
disclosure without incurring liability are
classified under four circumstances: (i) where
disclosure is under compulsion by law; (ii)
where there is a duty to the public to disclose;
(ii) where the interests of the bank require
disclosure; (iv) where the disclosure is made by
the express or implied consent of the
customer.24
21
For instance, Loyd v. Freshfield (1826) 2 C & P 325; Tassell
v.Cooper (1850) 9 CP 509, 137 ER 990; Foster v. Bank of
England (1862) 3F & F 124, 176 ER 96; and Hardy v. Veasey
(1868) LR 3 Ex. 107. For further discussion on the
evolution of the common law banker-customer
confidentiality, see Limburg (1925) and Stokes (2011).
22
(1924) 1 KB 461. The facts of the case were as follows:
the defendant banker disclosed to the plaintiff’s employer
that the plaintiff had made overdrafts to his account and
failed to make repayments as agreed. The plaintiff was
the customer of the defendant. The plaintiff’s employer
decided not to renew his employment contract. The
plaintiff sued the defendant for breach of duty of
confidentiality. The Court held that the defendant had
breached its implied duty to keep the customer’s
(plaintiff’s) financial transactions related to his account
confidential.
23
Tournier’s case (note 22) at pp 473, 485. This implies that
the privilege extends to any information which the bank
knows about the customer beyond what is in his/her
account.
24
Tournier’s case (note 22) at p 473.See also Breslin et al.,
(2003).
 The Banking Confidentiality Law in Tanzania: An Appraisal
The principle of a banker’s duty of
confidentiality to customers and its
qualifications stated in Tournier’s case are
generally accepted to be among the tenets of the
banking law and practice (Kianieff, 2012).
These principles have been confirmed in many
cases decided by the Court of Appeal of
England (Spearman, 2012). These include
Turner v. Royal Bank of Scotland plc,25Christofi v.
Barclays Bank plc,26 and Emmott v. Michael Wilson
& Partners Limited.27 In Lipkin Gorman v Karpnale
Ltd,28 the Court stated that the correctness of the
principles of law stated in Tournier’s case has
not been doubted since the case was decided.
Those principles have been referred to or
applied by courts in many common law
jurisdictions (Wessling, 1962; Rogers, 1975;
Latimer, 2005; Spearman, 2012).
The law in Tanzania prescribes penalties and
imposes sanctions on bank officers or banks
for breaching the banker’s bank of
confidentiality. The Banking and Financial
Institutions Act provides that an officer of a
bank who breaches the banker’s duty of
confidentiality owed to a customer commits a
criminal offence and, upon being convicted,
such officer shall be liable to pay a fine not
exceeding TZS20m or to be imprisoned for a
term not exceeding three years or to both.29
Where a customer fears that his/her bank is
about to infringe on, or has already breached
the duty of confidentiality, she/he has two
remedies against the bank. First, the customer
may sue the bank and recover damages for loss
arising from the disclosure of information
relating to his/her affairs. The court can order
the bank to pay the customer loss of profits
caused by disclosure.30 Second, the customer
may apply for an injunction to restrain the
bank from making further disclosure or
25
[1999] Lloyd’s Law Rep Banking 231.
26
[2000] 1 WLR 937.
27
[2008] Lloyd’s Rep 616.
28
[1989] 1 WLR 1340.
29
Section 36 (5).
30
Jackson v. Royal Bank of Scotland plc [2005] 1 WLR 377.
repeating the previous disclosure. In Tanzania,
a customer may apply the procedures provided
for under the Civil Procedure Code196631 to
obtain civil reliefs against a bank for breaching
the banking confidentiality.
Both legal and economic grounds rationalize
the banking confidentiality principle
(Plombeck, 1988; Chaikin (2011).32 With
regard to legal justifications, the banker’s duty
of confidentiality to a customer is enshrined in
statutory provisions regulating the banking
business (Aubert, 1984; Grassi & Calverese,
1995). The duty arises out of, among other
grounds, the contractual relationship between
the parties (Ping, 2004; Latimer, 2005).33 It is
an implied term of the contract between a
bank and its customer (Spearman, 2012;
Vishnevskiy, 2015). The banker-customer
contract involves a relationship between a
principal (the customer) and an agent (the
bank). In the principal-agent relationship the
agent has to observe the duty of confidentiality
to his/her principal with regard to information
obtained during the agency (Vishnevskiy,
2015). In Parry-Jones v. Law Society,34 the Court
ruled that banks as agents owe the duty of
confidentiality to their customers because of
the trust placed by customers in the
professional status of bankers. The banker-
customer relationship imposes fiduciary duty
on a bank to its customer (Glover, 1995; Plato-
Shinar, 2008; Lolo, 2011; Mthembu, 2014). It
has also been argued that the banker’s duty of
confidentiality forms part of the fundamental
31
Chapter 33 (RE 2002).
32
A variety of doctrines, grounded in contract, agency and tort
recognize and protect the interests of customers of banks and
financial institutions.
33
Attorney-General v. Guardian Newspapers Limited (No.2) [1990]
1 AC 109 where the Court of Appeal of England stated that:
“... a duty of confidence arises when confidential
information comes to the knowledge of a person (the
confidant) in circumstances where he has notice, or is held to
have agreed, that the information is confidential, with the
effect that it would be just in all circumstances that [the
confidant] should be precluded from disclosing the
information to others….” (at pp. 281).
34
[1969] 1 Ch 1.
AJ FM 24(1&2), January – December 2015| 5
Eugene E. Mniwasa
right to privacy (Cranston, 2002; Walsh,
2010). A person has the right to have his/her
privacy, including on matters involving
financial affairs, protected. As such a customer
is entitled to have his/her financial affairs with
a bank kept confidential.35 The banking
confidentiality protects a customer’s basic
human right of privacy.36 Regarding the
economic rationale, wrongful disclosures of
customers’ affairs may cause financial injury to
customers (Masete, 2012; Mandopi, 2011).
Also, the banking confidentiality promotes
customers’ confidence in the banking system
(Mandopi, 2010b). Confidence in banks and
confidentiality of information are vital to the
integrity of a banking system (Maynard, 1998).
A lack of confidence in the banking system can
undermine the banking business, economic
growth and development. If customers lack
confidence in their banks, there will be
widespread withdrawals of their money, and
this can result in the closure and liquidations
of banks (Chaikin, 2011). Rahman (2014)
argues that the success of the banking business
and the sanctity of the banker-customer
relationship are based on, among other factors,
the banker’s duty of confidentiality.
Banks can disclose information about their
customers’ affairs in specified circumstances
without incurring any liability. This disclosure
can occur in situations including the following:
(a) Where the law compels banks to make the
disclosure of customers’ affairs.37 A
35
Some countries have enacted specific laws that provide for
the protection of individual’s financial privacy. For instance,
the United States has the Right to Financial Privacy Act of
1978 codified at 12 U.S.C. Ch. 35, § 3401. For a discussion
on this legislation, see Prabhu (2007).
36
Although the Constitution of the United Republic of
Tanzania, Chapter 2 (RE 2002) does not explicitly refer
to banking or financial privacy, it provides for the rights
to protection to property and privacy. Arguably,
information pertaining to a bank customer’s account is
his or her ‘property’ that needs to be kept private.
37
See Bankers Trust Co. v. Shapira (1980) 1 WLR 1274;
Norwich Pharmacal Co. & Others v Customs and Excise
Commissioners [1974] AC 133.
6| AJ FM 24(1&2), January - December 2015
statutory law or a court order may compel
a bank to make disclosure of a customer’s
affairs in certain circumstances. In many
jurisdictions, laws for controlling offences
such as money laundering and financing of
terrorism require banks and financial
institutions to disclose financial
information of their customers to facilitate
investigation, detection and suppression of
such crimes (Healy, 2002; Bantekas, 2003).
(b) Where bank customers consent to have
their affairs disclosed.38 If a bank notifies its
customer and states clearly what it proposes
to do and why and obtains an express
consent from the customer, there will be no
breach of the banker duty of confidentiality.
A customer may request a bank to disclose
his/her affairs to a third party, for instance,
a creditor who may need information about
a customer’s trustworthiness or his/her
history relating to repayment of loans to the
bank providing information (Ellinger et al.,
2002; Schulze, 2007). Also, where there is
an implied consent by a customer, the bank
may make disclosure of its customer’s
affairs without incurring liability to
him/her.39
(c) Where interests of banks require the
disclosure of customers’ affairs.40 Where a
bank needs to protect its interests and this
involves the disclosure of a customer’s
affairs, it can disclose the information
without incurring liability to the customer
(Cranston, 2002; Spearman, 2012).
38
Tournier’s case (note 22) at p 472.
39
See for instance an Australian case of Lee Gleeson Pty Ltd
v Sterling Estates Pty Ltd (1991) 23 NSWLR 571.
40
This may occur where, for instance, a bank is suing the
customer for the recovery of a debt, it must state the
details of debt, or where the banker brings an action
against a third party such as a guarantor, or where the
banker wants to protect its reputation. In Sunderland v.
Barclays Bank (1938) 5 LDAB 163 it was held that the
bank was justified in disclosing to the customer’s
husband that his wife was a gambler. This was because
the husband was attacking the banker’s reputation, as it
had returned his wife’s cheques and he disagreed with
the banker’s decision.
 The Banking Confidentiality Law in Tanzania: An Appraisal
(d) Where interests of the public necessitate
the disclosure of customers’ affairs.41 The
banker’s duty of confidentiality is
overridden by the potential danger to the
state or public and the duty to disclose is
necessary for the protection of such public
interests (Chaikin, 2011; Spearman, 2012).
(e) Where trade customs and usages allow
the disclosure of customers’ affairs.42 If
practices and customary usages among
banks permit a bank to disclose a
customer’s affairs, the bank can make
disclose of such information without
incurring liability to the customer.
4. Compulsion to Disclose Customers’
Affairs by Law
As pointed out in section three above, laws
compel banks to disclose affairs of their
customers in certain situations without
incurring any liability. In Tanzania, the
compulsion to make disclosures by law falls
under two broad categories: compulsion by the
statutory law, and compulsion by court orders.
4.1 Compulsion by Statutory Law
Several statutes in Tanzania compel banks to
disclose information about affairs of their
customers (Longopa, 2015). Such information
may be required by authorities for purposes,
among others, of investigating, preventing and
fighting criminal activities. To illustrate the
above point this part will look at three statutes,
namely the Prevention of Terrorism Act
2002,43 the Anti-Money Laundering Act
2006,44 and the Prevention and Combating of
Corruption Act 2007.45
41
For instance, during the war time a bank will have a
public duty to disclose information relating to a
particular customer to the authorities if it had knowledge
of that customer trading with the enemy. See, for
instance, Weld-Blundell v. Stephens (1920) AC 956.
42
Section 48 (1) of the Banking and Financial Institutions
Act.
43
Chapter 19 (RE 2002).
44
Chapter 423.
45
Chapter 329.
4.1.1 The Prevention of Terrorism Act 2002
Section 41(2) of the Prevention of Terrorism
Act provides for mandatory reporting
requirements for banks to enable law
enforcement agencies to detect and prevent
financing of terrorist acts. The Act requires a
bank to report to the police46and to the
authority mandated to supervise and regulate
activities of commercial banks that such a
bank is not in possession or control of a
property owned or controlled by or held for
terrorists. The reports, which should be
submitted every three months, must indicate
particulars of the persons, accounts and
transactions involved and the total value of the
property involved.
The Act provides further that a responsible
officer of a bank shall report to a police officer
a transaction in respect of which there is a
reasonable ground to suspect that it is related
to, or associated with, the commission of
terrorism.47 Failure by the designated officer of
a bank to make a disclosure or submit a report
about a suspicious transaction to the police
amounts to an offence punishable by
imprisonment for a term not less than twelve
months.48 An officer of a bank who makes a
disclosure or submits a report about a
customer’s suspicious transactions linked to
terrorism in good faith to the authorities shall
not be liable for criminal or civil proceedings
for taking such action.49
The information about accounts or property
held by terrorists or their associates in banks or
financial transactions conducted by terrorists
or their allies through banks can be useful in
detecting, uncovering or preventing financing
of terrorism. The information can be helpful in
46
The Tanzania Police Force has a special anti-terrorism
unit. The report must be submitted to an officer having
the rank of or above the rank of the Assistant
Superintendent of Police.
47
Section 41(3)).
48
Section 41 (5).
49
Section 41 (4).
AJ FM 24(1&2), January – December 2015| 7
Eugene E. Mniwasa
enabling the relevant authorities to identify,
declare and freeze funds and other assets of
terrorists.50 The above provisions of the
Prevention of Terrorism Act can be applied to
ensure that banks in Tanzania are not used to
facilitate the financing and commission of
terrorist acts.
4.1.2. The Anti-Money Laundering Act 2006
The Anti-money Laundering Act requires
banks and other ‘reporting persons’51 to submit
money laundering suspicious reports to the
Financial Intelligence Unit (FIU). 52 Section
17(1) (a) and (b) of the Act provides that where
a designated officer of a bank suspects that
funds or property held by a customer are
proceeds of crime, or are linked to, or are to be
used for commission of money laundering or
its predicate offence, s/he shall within twenty
four hours and, wherever possible, before any
transaction is carried out: (i) take reasonable
measures to ascertain the purpose of the
transaction, the origin and destination of the
funds or property involved, and the identity
and address of any beneficiary of the funds or
property; (ii) prepare a report about the
transaction; and (iii) submit such report to the
FIU. The designated officer will submit a
suspicious transaction report to the FIU to
enable it to initiate an investigation of money
laundering activities.
A designated officer of a bank who fails to
report a suspicious money laundering
50
Regulations 4, 5, 6 and 7 of the Prevention of Terrorism
(General) Regulations 2014 (G.N. No. 7 of 2014).
51
Under Section 3 of the Anti-money Laundering Act
‘reporting persons’ include banks, financial institutions,
cash dealers, accountants, real estate agents, dealers in
precious stones, work of arts or metals; regulators,
customs officers, attorneys, notaries and other legal
professionals and auctioneers.
52
The FlU, which is a department under the Ministry of
Finance, is responsible for receiving, analysing and
disseminating, suspicious transaction reports and other
information regarding potential money laundering or
terrorist financing received from the reporting persons
and other sources from within and outside Tanzania.
See Section 4 of the Anti-Money Laundering Act.
8| AJ FM 24(1&2), January - December 2015
transaction to the FIU shall be guilty of an
offence and be liable to pay a fine not
exceeding TZS5m or be imprisoned for a term
not exceeding five years. Where a body
corporate has failed to ensure that the report is
submitted, such entity shall be liable to pay a
fine of not exceeding TZS10m or three times
of the market value of the funds or property
involved, whichever amount is greater.53
The Act provides that notwithstanding any duty
relating to the banking confidentiality or other
restrictions on disclosure of information
imposed by any law or otherwise, a designated
officer of a bank shall not be liable to the person
whose information has been disclosed to the
FIU or a law enforcement agency.54 This
provision grants immunity to officers of banks
and their banks for reporting money laundering
suspicious transactions to the authorities in
accordance with the provisions of the Act and
regulations made thereunder. 55
Reports concerning money laundering
suspicious transactions submitted to the FIU or
law enforcement agencies by banks can be used
by the relevant authorities to detect, uncover,
and suppress money laundering and its
predicate crimes. Such information can be
useful in criminal proceedings which may lead
to conviction and punishment of money
launderers.
4.1.3 The Prevention and Combating of Corruption
Act 2007
Section 8 of the Prevention and Combating of
Corruption Act provides that where the
Director-General of the Prevention and
Combating of Corruption Bureau (PCCB) has
reasonable grounds to believe that a
corruption-related offence has been committed
and a bank account or banker’s books or
document are likely to be relevant for the
53
Section 17 (4).
54
Section 21.
55
The Anti-Money Laundering Regulations 2012
(G.N.No. 298 of 2012)
 The Banking Confidentiality Law in Tanzania: An Appraisal
purpose of investigation of such offence, the
Director-General may authorise, in writing, an
officer of the PCCB to: (i) investigate and
inspect such account, books or document; (ii)
require any person who is in possession or
control thereof to produce such account, books
or document to facilitate such investigation
and the disclosure of all or any information
related thereto; and (iii) take copies of such
account, books or document of any relevant
entries therein.56
The above Act states that a person who fails to
produce a bank account, books, or document,
or fails to permit an officer of the PCCB to
scrutinise or to take copies of any relevant entry
thereof, commits a criminal offence. The
wrongdoer is liable to pay a fine not exceeding
TZS 500,000, or to be imprisoned for a term not
exceeding two years or to both.57
Securing information related to accounts of
customers of banks suspected of acquiring funds
corruptly can be used to discover the
commission of corruption-related offences,
charge offenders and forfeit assets unlawfully
obtain from corruption. The PCCB can apply
the provisions of the Prevention and Combating
of Corruption Act described above to deal with
corruption and related crimes that involve the
use of banks.
4.2 Compulsion by Court Orders
Courts may compel banks to disclose
information relating to the affairs of their
customers. Banks are subject to rules of
disclosure where they are parties to litigation
or arbitration proceedings.58 A court order will
be served on a bank, compel its officials to
appear before a court and produce books,
documents or letters containing a customer’s
affairs. The banker’s electronic records or
56
Section 8 (5).
57
Section 8 (6).
58
William v. William [1987] 3 All ER 257.
information are now recognised as the
banker’s books.59
Section 81 of the Evidence Act allows a party
to legal proceedings to apply to a court for an
order to allow inspection and taking copies of
any entries in a banker’s books for the
purposes of proceedings.60 The above Section
provides that on the application of any party to
a legal proceeding, a court may permit such
party to inspect and take copies of any entries
in banker’s book for purposes of such
proceeding.61
In applying the provisions of Section 81 of the
Evidence Act, a distinction should be made
between civil and criminal cases. With regard
to criminal cases, it stated in Williams v.
Summerfield62 that courts should warn
themselves of the importance of steps that they
are taking in making an order of inspection
and discovery, ensure that such power is
exercised carefully, and take into account,
among other things, whether there is evidence
to support the charge against accused persons.
Courts should not make orders for discovery
to allow the police to undertake what is
59
Section 67 of the Evidence Act provides that “... Bankers
books’ include ledgers, cash books, account books and any
other records used in the ordinary business of the bank or
financial institution, whether the records are in a written
form or a data message or kept on information system
including but not limited to computers and storage devices,
magnetic tape, micro-film, video or computer display
screen or any other form of mechanical or electronic data
retrieval mechanism. For discussions about the
admissibility of electronic evidence in Tanzania, see
Makulilo (2007) and Mambi (2013).
60
The Act defines ‘legal proceedings’ as “... any civil or
criminal proceedings or enquiry in which evidence is or
may be given, and includes arbitration.”
61
In Barker v. Wilson [1980] 1 WLR 884, it was held that
the term ‘Bankers’ Books’ included permanent records
maintained by banks which involve technology including
microfilms.
62
[1972] 3 WLR 131. The Court of Appeal of England
was making an interpretation of Section 7 of the English
Banker’s Book Evidence Act of 1879 which is pari
material to Section 81of Tanzania’s Evidence Act.
AJ FM 24(1&2), January – December 2015| 9
Eugene E. Mniwasa
referred to as ‘fishing expeditions.’63 As
regards civil proceedings, the case law has laid
down the rule that the statutory power to order
inspection should not be inconsistent with, and
not override the general law of discovery.64
In Tanzania, the law governing the discovery
and inspection of documents is embodied in the
Civil Procedure Code 1966,65 the Evidence
Act66 and case law.67 The Civil Procedure Code
provides that a party to a suit may apply to a
court for an order to compel another party to
make a discovery of documents relating to
matters contested in a suit.68A court can order a
party to a suit to produce a document in his/her
possession or power.69 After securing
production of the documents, the party who has
applied for the discovery may inspect them and
take copies of such documents.70 Where
inspection of any business books is applied for,
instead of ordering inspection of the original
books, a court may order a copy of any entries
in the books be furnished and verified by an
affidavit of a person who examined the copy of
the original entries.71 Accordingly,
documents—including banker’s books or copies
thereof containing information about the affairs
of customers—may be produced and inspected
applying the above procedure. As such a court
can order the production and inspection of a
banker’s books containing information about an
63
A ‘fishing expedition’ refers to an attempt, through broad
discovery request or random questions, to elicit
information from another party in hope something
relevant might be found, especially such an attempt that
exceeds the scope of discovery allowed by procedural
rules.
64
See South Staffordshire Tramsways Co. v. Ebbsmith [1895] 2
QB 669, Pollock v. Garle [1898] 1 Ch 1, and Waterhouse v.
Barker [1924] 2 KB 759
65
See Order XI.
66
See Part IV.
67
See, for instance, Trust Bank Tanzania Limited v Le-Marsh
Enterprises Limited & 2 Others, Commercial Case No. 4 of
2000, High Court of Tanzania (Commercial Division), at
Dar es Salaam (unreported).
68
Order XI Rule 10.
69
Order XI Rule 12.
70
Order XI Rules 13 and 14.
71
Order XI Rule 16.
10| AJ FM 24(1&2), January - December 2015
account of a party to litigation in accordance
with the provisions of the Evidence Act.
There are other situations where banks can be
compelled to make disclosure of information
of their customers to a court. These include a
disclosure made in proceedings involving an
application for a grant of probate or letters of
administration of a deceased customer’s estate;
a disclosure made in proceedings of
bankruptcy of a bank customer; and a
disclosure necessary for the compliance with a
garnishee order served on a bank attaching
money in the account of its customer.
The Proceeds of Crime Act 199172 describes
situations where the police, with the assistance
of courts, may compel banks to give
information about transactions conducted
through bank accounts. Section 63A(i) provides
that where the Inspector General of Police
(IGP) considers that the commission a serious
offence, predicate offence or money laundering
is likely to be found in a bank account, and that
the procedure for obtaining an order of the
court is likely to defeat investigation, the IGP
may authorise a police officer73 to investigate
the bank account and such authorisation shall
be a sufficient warrant for production of
information about such account by the bank.
The authorised police officer may take copies of
the relevant entries from the account. Where it
appears necessary that an account should be
held for a period exceeding seven days, the
police officer shall be required to obtain the
leave of a court for continued holding of such
account.74 A person who fails to produce a bank
account or obstructs the police officer from
scrutinising such an account shall commit an
offence punishable by imprisonment for two
72
Chapter 256 (RE 2002).
73
The police officer should be of or above the rank of the
Assistant Superintendent of Police.
74
Section 63A (2). Under Section 63D the application for
leave of the court can be made by the IGP or the
Director of Criminal Investigation by lodging a chamber
application supported by an affidavit.
 The Banking Confidentiality Law in Tanzania: An Appraisal
years or payment of fine of not less than
TZS1m or both.75
Section 65(1) of the Proceeds of Crime Act
provides that the Director of Public
Prosecutions (DPP) may apply to a court for
the grant of a monitoring order that will direct a
bank to give information about transactions
conducted through an account held in such
bank to the Inspector General of Police (IGP).76
The court may issue the order if it is satisfied
that there are reasonable grounds for suspecting
that a holder of the account has committed or is
involved in the commission of a specified
crime, or has benefited from the commission of
such offence.77 The order shall indicate the
name of the account’s holder and the kind of
information the bank is required to furnish.78 A
bank that contravenes a monitoring order or
furnishes untrue or misleading information to
the police shall commit an offence and be liable
to pay a fine not exceeding TZS1m.79
Banks in Tanzania may be required to provide
information regarding customers’ dealings to
facilitate criminal investigations or
proceedings in foreign countries. Section 35(3)
of the Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters
Act 199180 provides that where criminal
investigations or proceedings relating to
commission of a serious narcotic offence or
money laundering by authorities in a foreign
country and information about transaction
conducted through an account held in a bank
in Tanzania is relevant to such investigation or
proceedings, the relevant authority of the
foreign country may request the Attorney
General of Tanzania to obtain a monitoring
order under the Proceeds of Crime Act. The
order shall compel the bank to provide
information to the IGP about transactions
75
Section 63A (3).
76
Section 65 (2).
77
Section 65(3).
78
Section 65 (4).
79
Section 65 (5).
80
Chapter 254 (RE 2002).
conducted through the account. The Attorney
General may authorise a police officer to apply
to the High Court of Tanzania for the grant of
the order requested by the foreign authority.
5. Banking Confidentiality in Tanzania:
Deficiencies in the Law and Challenges in
Implementation
Looking at the Banking and Financial
Institutions Act and the Bank of Tanzania Act,
the law does provide for some aspects of the
banker’s duty of confidentiality to its
customers.81 One can observe that the banking
confidentiality law in Tanzania is not well
detailed compared to laws in other
jurisdictions.82 As pointed out in section four
above, the provisions that allow the disclosure
of affairs of bank customers are embodied in
several statutes, including the Banking and
Financial Institutions Act, the Prevention of
Terrorism Act, the Anti-Money Laundering
Act and the Prevention and Combating of
Corruption Act. However, the provisions of the
above Acts are not well harmonised. There are
discrepancies in relation to procedures for
compelling banks to disclose affairs of their
customers. Additionally, penalties or sanctions
prescribed for non-disclosure of the customers’
affairs prescribed in the statutory law differ
significantly. Therefore, the law on the banker’s
duty of confidentiality in Tanzania has
deficiencies and limitations.
81
Besides prescribing generally the banker’s duty of
confidentiality and some exceptions to the principle, the
law contained in the above statutes does not describe in
detail specific situations where customer’s affairs can be
lawfully disclosed, and safeguards which can be used to
protect confidentiality of information disclosed to other
authorities or entities such as law enforcement agencies,
credit reference bureaus or courts.
82
For instance, the banking confidentiality law in
Malaysia contained in Sections 96 - 102 of the Banking
and Financial Institutions Act 1989 (Act 372) is more
detailed. Similarly, Section 47 and Third Schedule of
Singapore’s Banking Act (Cap. 19, 2008 Rev. Ed)
contain reasonably comprehensive provisions on banking
confidentiality.
AJ FM 24(1&2), January – December 2015| 11
Eugene E. Mniwasa
The disclosure of a bank customer’s affairs
sanctioned by his or her consent and the
revelation of a customer’s affairs necessitated
to protect interests of the bank seem to pose
little problem. The disclosure for ‘public
interest’ is problematic. The disclosure for
‘public interest’ is also problematic. The
question is: what is meaning of a ‘public
interest’ for the purpose of a banker-customer
relationship? It has been observed that
sometimes it not easy to determine what ‘public
interest’ entails (Walsh, 2010). Thus, ‘public
interests’ can be determined on a case-by-case
basis.83 The statutory law in Tanzania has not
stipulated the meaning of ‘public interest’ for
the purpose of making disclosure of affairs of a
bank’s customer. Similarly, local courts have
not elucidated the meaning of ‘public interest’
for the purposes of disclosure of affairs of bank
customers.
The circumstances under which banks in
Tanzania are required to disclose affairs of their
customers seem to be wide and expanding.
Under the Anti-money Laundering Act, a bank
is compelled to report suspicious transactions
involving money laundering and its predicate
crimes to the FIU or the law enforcement
agencies. The Act lists the money laundering
predicate crimes.84 The Minister (responsible for
financial matters) has powers to extend the list
of money laundering predicate crimes. If the
Minister broadens the list, circumstances where
banks will be compelled to make disclosures of
their customers’ affairs will be expanded. The
principle of banking confidentiality will be
encroached further if the Minister expands the
list of money laundering predicate crimes.
83
Disclosure for public interests may cover situations
where there is a need to uncover crimes and other
misdeeds can adversely affect the public or society. See,
for instance, Initial Services Limited v Putterill & Another
[1967] 3 All ER 145. For a discussion on difficulties in
determining public interests, see also Koomen (1994).
84
Besides listing down money laundering predicate crimes,
Section 3 of the Anti-Money Laundering Act authorizes
the Minister for finance to declare, by notice published in
the Gazette, any offence to be a crime predicate to money
laundering.
12| AJ FM 24(1&2), January - December 2015
The disclosure under the Prevention of
Terrorism Act, which requires banks to submit
reports to the relevant authorities to show that
they are not in possession or control of
accounts or properties owned by terrorists and
to inform the authorities when they have
reasonable justifications to believe that
transactions carried out by their customers are
associated with terrorist acts, is challenging
and raises concerns. Some of the concerns are:
how can a bank, which is not a law
enforcement authority or an intelligence
service agency, determine with certainty that
money held in account of its customer
originated from, or will be used to finance
terrorist acts?85 Why shouldn’t the anti-
terrorism unit of the police, which has the
capacity and means, conduct investigations,
obtain evidence about the link between a
customer’s account or property and terrorism,
and make applications to the court to require a
bank to make disclosure of information of its
customer? Isn’t there any possibility for banks
of making disclosures of affairs of their
customers even where there are no reasonable
grounds for believing that transactions
conducted by their customers involve
financing of terrorism? It is apparent that the
anti-terrorism law does not address adequately
the above challenges.
As pointed out earlier, the law compels banks
to submit information about affairs of their
customers to designated law enforcement
agencies such as the police, FIU, PCCB and
the regulator of the banking sector, namely the
BoT. The law does not prohibit, in clear terms,
the above authorities from sharing such
information among them. The regulator and
law enforcement agencies can exchange and
85
Banks are required to use certain indicators before making
decisions as whether money in the accounts is linked to or
associated with terrorism. However, the challenge is such
indicators may not be reliable. See, for instance, the
Financial Intelligence Unit’s Anti-money Laundering
Guidelines for Banking Institutions, No. 2, available at
<www.fiu.go.tz/AMLguidelines For Banking Institutions.
pdf)> (accessed on April 15, 2016).
 The Banking Confidentiality Law in Tanzania: An Appraisal
share information among themselves without
the consent or knowledge of customers of
banks. This has been the practice in other
jurisdictions (Green, 2013; Weisstub, 2016).
Such exchange of information may prejudice
rights of customers without them having
recourse against the authorities that disclose
the information wrongfully.
The Bank of Tanzania Act provides for the
creation of credit reference bureaus to collect
and provide information on the payment
history of clients of banks and financial
institutions, savings and credit schemes, and
other entities engaged in providing credits in
Tanzania. Upon receiving requests, the bureaus
are authorised to provide information about
credit reports of customers of banks to persons
or entities that have made the requests.86 Credit
reference agencies collect information on the
creditworthiness of individuals from banks and
provide such information to other persons or
entities, particularly potential lenders. There is
some doubt as to which exception is applicable
(if any) to divulge information about a
customer’s affairs: the ‘consent of the
customer’, the ‘duty to the public’ or ‘interests
of the bank.’ The law does not impose an
obligation of banks to prohibit the credit
reference agencies from disclosing information
obtained from banks to other persons. The law
does not state clearly the liability of bureaus that
disclose customers’ information to unauthorised
persons. Thus, there is a risk that information
about customers’ credit transactions with banks
can be disclosed to other persons, and the
customers may have no recourse against those
persons.
Under the pretext of providing mutual
assistance to international agencies responsible
for fighting transnational crimes and foreign
countries,87 authorities in Tanzania do direct
86
Section 48 (3) (b) and (c) of the Banking and Financial
Institutions Act.
87
Tanzania is a party to several international treaties that
require the signatories to exchange information and provide
the BoT to require banks to disclose
information relating to affairs of their
customers. This information is submitted to
foreign authorities and agencies when
investigating or conducting proceedings
against individuals and entities suspected to
have links with money launderers or terrorists.
The international legal instruments provide
that state parties may not refuse requests for
legal assistance on the ground of banking
confidentiality.88 There is nothing that can
prohibit these foreign agencies and authorities
to share information about bank customers’
affairs among themselves. This may be done
without the knowledge or consent of
customers of banks in Tanzania.
The use of electronic banking in Tanzania,89
like in other parts of the world, has brought
about new challenges in so far as the
implementation of a banker’s duty of
confidentiality is concerned. These include
limited security on customer data; exposure of
customer data to a greater number of third
parties; and the lack of specific law that govern
internet banking (Nitsure, 2003; Thulani et al.,
2009; Walsh, 2010; Oladejo & Akanbi, 2012).
The burden on banks to maintain
confidentiality in respect of their customers’
affairs is greater than ever and requires more
control systems.
mutual assistance in fighting transnational crimes. These
include the United Nations Convention against Illicit
Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances
1988, the International Convention for the Suppression of
the Financing of Terrorism 1999, the United Nations
Convention against Transnational Organized Crime 2000,
and the United Nations Convention against Corruption
2003. These international instruments stipulate that banking
confidentiality should not be an obstacle to international co-
operation in fighting international crimes.
88
See for instance Article 7 (5) of the United Nations
Convention against Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and
Psychotropic Substances 1988, and Article 12 (2) of the
International Convention for the Suppression of
the Financing of Terrorism 1999.
89
Most banks in Tanzania use electronic banking systems.
See Rumanyika (2015).
AJ FM 24(1&2), January – December 2015| 13
Eugene E. Mniwasa
6. Conclusion
This article has described in brief the banker-
customer relationship. It has outlined the
duties of a bank and a customer towards each
other, and pointed out that a bank has a duty,
among others, not to disclose information
about the affairs of its customers. A banker’s
duty of confidentiality is provided for
statutorily, and has been described by case
laws. Several qualifications to the banking
confidentiality principle have been illustrated.
The article has shown that some laws in
Tanzania erode the banker’s duty of
confidentiality. The application of these laws is
important to prevent banks from for
commission of crimes or civil wrongs that may
affect other persons and the society at large.
These laws have deficiencies that need to be
rectified. At times, the procedures for making
disclosure of bank customers’ affairs prescribed
by the law are not followed. During certain
legal proceedings courts have can order banks
to release information about customers’ affairs.
The challenge is that information concerning
customers’ transactions may be disclosed to
unintended persons during proceedings.
The adherence of the principle of banking
confidentiality and making disclosures of bank
customers’ affairs require laws to strike a
balance between the need to protect the society
against crimes—such as money laundering,
terrorism and corruption—and the need to
protect individual rights those customers.
Striking this balance is not an easy task. While
there are justifiable reasons for making
disclosure of bank customers’ affairs, there are
concerns about the pace and direction in
which the law on banking confidentiality is
moving. It seems that the balance between the
preservation of private rights of bank
customers and the disclosure for public interest
has moved too far in the direction of
disclosure, and this is failing to sufficiently
protect individual rights of customers. If this
trend continues, it will lead to a point where
14| AJ FM 24(1&2), January - December 2015
the concept of a banker’s confidentiality to a
customer in Tanzania will be rendered
meaningless.90
Several measures can be adopted to address
the above situation. The law on banker’s duty
of confidentiality to customers in Tanzania
should be reformed. A statutory law should be
enacted that will describe what a bank
confidentiality comprises, and prescribe in
detail situations where the confidentiality can
be lawfully lifted. There should be
harmonisation of the provisions of law on
banking confidentiality. The law should
prescribe procedures that may be followed
when authorities in Tanzania seek to obtain
information about affairs of bank customers.
The law should also stipulate clear guidelines
and procedures to be applied by banks in
determining ‘suspicious transactions’ before
submitting reports about those transactions to
authorities such as the FIU. Additionally, the
law needs to prescribe mechanisms for
protecting information of bank customers
furnished to law enforcement agencies, courts
and other entities such as credit reference
bureaus and other persons who may have
access to customers’ information in the course
of performing their duties to banks.
Moreover, whenever the Minister responsible
for financial matters designates certain
offences as money laundering predicate
crimes,91 the law should provide for a
requirement that the list of those crimes be
supplied to banks and financial institutions
which must notify their customers about the
offences promptly. Furthermore, the law
should prescribe a requirement that before
entering into a banker-customer relationship, a
bank must provide information about the
rights and duties of the parties, including the
90
In other jurisdictions some commentators have
remarked the above situation tantamount to the ‘demise’
of the bank duty of confidentiality to the customer. See,
for instance, Levi (1991).
91
See Section 3 of the Anti-Money Laundering Act.
 The Banking Confidentiality Law in Tanzania: An Appraisal
banker’s duty of confidentiality to its
customers. The BoT should ensure that
commercial banks provide this information to
their customers.92 The above measures will
assist, to a certain extent, to alleviate the
disadvantageous position of bank customers in
Tanzania with regard to the banking
confidentiality principle.
References
Aubert, M., (1984), “The Limits of Banking
Secrecy under Domestic and International Law,”
International Tax & Business Law, 2(2): 273–297.
Bantekas, I., (2003), “The International Law of
Terrorist Financing,” American Journal of
International Law, 97(2): 315–333.
Breslin, J., (2003), “Relationship between Credit
Institutions and Customers,” in A.M. Cotter
(ed.), Banking and Corporate Services, London:
Cavendish Publishing.
Chaikin, D., (2011), “Adapting the Qualifications
to the Banker’s Common Law Duty of
Confidentiality to Fight Transnational Crime,”
Sydney Law Review, 33: 265–294.
Cranston, R., (2002), Principles of Law of Banking,
(2nd ed.), Oxford: Oxford University Press.
de Koker, L., (2016), “Money Laundering
Compliance: The Challenge of Technology,” In,
M. Dion, D. Weisstub, & J. Richet (eds.),
Financial Crimes: Psychological, Technological, and
Ethical Issues, Geneva: Springer International
Publishing.
Ellinger, E.P., E.Z., Lomnicka, & R. Hooley,
(2002), Ellinger’s Modern Law of Banking, (4th ed.),
Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Filder, P.J.M., (2006. Sheldon and Filder’s Practice
and Law of Banking, (11th ed.), Plymouth:
Macdonald & Evans.
92
The BoT can make regulations to require commercial
banks provide such information and supervise its
implementation.
Financial Ombudsman Service, (2005), “The
Banker’s Duty of Confidentiality to the
Customer,” Ombudsman News, Issue No. 45: 3 – 9.
Glover, J., (1995), “Banks and Fiduciary
Relationships,” Bond Law Review, 7(1): 50–66.
Grassi, P.S. & D. Calverese, (1995), “Duty of
Confidentiality of Banks in Switzerland: Where
it Stands and Where it Goes-Recent
Developments and Experience-the Swiss
Assistance to, and Cooperation with the Italian
Authorities in the Investigation of Corruption
among Civil Servants in Italy (the Clean Hands
Investigation): How Much is too Much,” Pace
International Law Review, 329–372.
Green, B.A., (2013), “The Attorney-Client
Privilege-Selective Compulsion, Selective Waiver
and Selective Disclosure: Is Bank Regulation
Exceptional?” Journal of the Professional Lawyer,
85–108.
Government of Tanzania, Anti-money Laundering
Guidelines for Banking Institutions, No. 2, available
at <www.fiu.go.tz/AMLguidelines For Banking
Institutions.pdf)> (accessed on April 15, 2016).
Healy, N.M., (2002), “The Impact of September
11th on Anti-Money Laundering Efforts, and the
European Union and Commonwealth
Gatekeeper Initiatives,” The International Lawyer,
733–749.
Kapinga, W.B., (2010), “A Review of the Anti-
Money Laundering System in Tanzania,” The
Lawyer Tanzania, 1(1): 36–49.
Kianieff, M., (2012), “Jones v. Tsige: A Banking Law
Perspective,” Ottawa Law Review, 44 (3): 507–528.
Koomen, K., (1994), “Breach of Confidence and the
Public Interest Defence: Is it in the Public Interest?
A Review of the English Public Interest Defence
and the Options for Australia,” Queensland
University of Technology Law Journal, 56–88.
Latimer, P.H., (2005), “Bank Secrecy in Australia:
Terrorism Legislation as the New Exception to
the Tournier Rule,” Journal of Money Laundering
Control, 8(1): 56–65.
Limburg, H.R., (1925), “The Bankers’ and the
Brokers’ Privilege,” Columbia Law Review, 25(2):
152–163.
Lolo, F.T.A., (2013), “Between Keeping Bank
Secrecy and Reporting Suspicious Transaction in
AJ FM 24(1&2), January – December 2015| 15
Eugene E. Mniwasa

the Fight Against Money Laundering, Review Muhammad, KG., (2015), “An Appraisal of the
from the Perspective of Law Number 8 of 2010,” Relationship between Banker and Customer in
Law Review,11(2): 75–88. Nigeria,” European Journal of Business and
Management, 7(4): 230–237.
Longopa, E., (1925), “Eroding Banker’s
Confidentiality Obligation through Cracking Mugarura, N., (2015), “The Jeopardy of the Bank
Down Criminality in Tanzania,” Open University in Enforcement of Normative Anti-Money
Law Journal, 16(1): 36–59. Laundering and Countering Financing of
Terrorism Regimes,” Journal of Money Laundering
Makulilo, A.B., (2007), “Admissibility of Computer
Control, 18(3): 352–370.
Evidence in Tanzania,” Digital Evidence Journal,
4(2): 76–80. Oladejo, M., & T. Akanbi, (2012), “Bankers
Perceptions of Electronic Banking in Nigeria: A
Mambi, A.J., (2013), “Electronic evidence in
Review of Post Consolidation Experience,”
Tanzania,” Digital Evidence and Electronic
Research Journal of Finance and Accounting,
Signature Law Review, 10: 123–127.
3(2):1–11.
Mandopi, K., (2010a), “The Banker’s Duty of
Nitsure, R.R., (2003), “E-banking: Challenges and
Confidentiality and Anti-terrorist Financing in
Opportunities,” Economic and Political Weekly,
Tanzania Part I,” The Lawyer Tanzania, 1(1):
5377–5381.
18–34.
Ping, H., (2008), “Banking Secrecy and Money
—, (2010b), “The Banker’s Duty of Confidentiality
Laundering,” Journal of Money Laundering Control,
and Anti-terrorist Financing in Tanzania Part
7(4): 376–382.
II,” The Lawyer Tanzania, 1(1): 65–87.
Plato-Shinar, R. & R. H. Weber, (2008), “Three
—, (2011), “Anti-Terrorists’ Financing: Does it
Models of the Bank’s Fiduciary Duty,” Law &
Undermine Privacy of the Customer of a Bank?”
Financial Markets Review, 422 – 438.
Law Reformer Journal, 3(1): 47-59.
Plombeck, C.T., (1988), “Confidentiality and
Masete, N.T., (2012), “The Challenges in
Disclosure: The Money Laundering Control Act
Safeguarding Financial Privacy in South Africa,”
of 1986 and Banking Secrecy,” The International
Journal of International Commercial Law and
Lawyer, 22(1): 69–98.
Technology, 7(3): 248–259.
Prabhu, A. A., (2007), “Contracting for Financial
Maynard, P.D., (1998), “Offshore Banking
Secrecy: Myth or Reality?,” Journal of Money Privacy: The Rights of Banks and Customers
Under the Reauthorized Patriot Act,” Loyola
Laundering Control, 1(4): 316-318.
University Chicago Law Journal, 39(3): 51–121.
Mniwasa, E.E., (2015), “Money Laundering
Rahman, A.A., (2014), “Combating Money
Control in Tanzania: The Convergence of
Laundering and the Future of Banking Secrecy
Economics, Politics and Law” in G. D. Mjema
Laws in Malaysia,” Journal of Money Laundering
& G.E. Kaganda (eds.), Socio-Economic Dynamics
Control, 17(2): 219–229.
in Tanzania: Lessons and Experiences, Dar Es
Salaam: Dar Es Salaam University Press. Spearman, R., (2012), “Disclosure of Confidential
Information: Tournier and ‘Disclosure in the
Mthembu, M.A., (2010), “Electronic Fund
Interests of the Bank’ Reappraised,” Butterworths
Transfer: Exploring the Difficulties of
Securities,” Journal of International Commercial Journal of Banking & Financial Law, 78–82.
Law & Technology, 5(4): 201–205. Rogers, M., (1975), “An Outline of the Law
Governing the Relationship between Banker and
—, (2014), “Marriage of Convenience: Bank–
Customer in Kenya,” Journal of African Law,
Customer Relationship in the Age of the
Internet: A South African Perspective,” Journal of 19(1-2):52–65.
International Commercial Law and Technology, 9(1): Rumanyika, J.D., (2015), “Obstacles Towards
14–23. Adoption of Mobile Banking in Tanzania: A

16| AJ FM 24(1&2), January - December 2015

 The Banking Confidentiality Law in Tanzania: An Appraisal
Review,” International Journal of Information
Technology and Business Management, 35(1): 1–17.
Schulze, H., (2007), “Confidentiality and Secrecy
in the Bank-client Relationship,” Juta's Business
Law, 15 (3):122-126.
Stokes, R., (2011), “The Genesis of Banking
Confidentiality,” Journal of Legal History, 32(3):
279–294.
Thulani, D., C. Tofara & R. Langton, (2009),
“Adoption and Use of Internet Banking in
Zimbabwe: An Exploratory Study,” Journal of
Internet Banking & Commerce, 14(1): 1–13.
Varshney, P.N., S. L., Gupta & T. D., (2005),
Principles of Banking, (1st ed.), New Delhi: Sultan
Chand & Sons.
Vishnesvkiy, A., (2015), “Bank Secrecy: A Look at
Modern Trends from a Theoretical Standpoint,”
Pravo Zhurnal Vysshey Shkoly Ekonomiki, 4: 140–
146.
Walsh, T., (2010), “The Banker’s Duty of
Confidentiality: Dead or Alive?” Edinburgh
Student Law Review, 1(2):1–14.
Wessling, R.B., (1962), “Disclosure of Records:
The Duty of a Bank as to Customer
Information,” Michigan Law Review, 60(6):781–
797.
Young, M.A., (2013), “The Exploitation of
Offshore Financial Centres: Banking
Confidentiality and Money Laundering,” Journal
of Money Laundering Control, 16(3):198–208.
AJ FM 24(1&2), January – December 2015| 17