schoolchildren in front of the HDC sponsored school bus
= Haydom Development Company Ltd.
= Haydom Lutheran Hospital
= (The Foundation) Friends of Haydom
the conflict HDC vs. SHV/FoH
medical students who lost their HLH- grants:
director Olsens letter to Fanuel. D Bellet
D. Bellets request
for help to Halvdan Jakobsen
Issues in the conflict HDC vs. HLH/FoH:
unilateral physical take-over of Mulbadaw Farm and Central
Maintenance and Service Centre by order from the Foundation
Friends of Haydom in Norway; without producing any court
injunction or any legal document authorizing such a take-over.
conduct of the chairman of the Board of Directors of Haydom
Development Company Ltd; his lack of loyalty to lawful
decisions made by the Board in 2006 and his unauthorized and
secret dealings with Joseph Tadayo leading up to the
unilateral physical take-over mentioned above.
deceit by FoH in fulfilling their own board decision of
October 2005 in financing HDC Ltd
lack of registration of the entity running Mulbadaw Farm and
Central Maintenance and Service Centre after 12th
August 2006; how can a foreign foundation own and run
businesses in Tanzania without being registered in Tanzania?
suspicion of corruption aimed at avoiding the case to be
considered by the court.
more about the conflict here.
conflict HDC vs. HLH/FoH
summary of some events
Written by Halvdan Jakobsen
History before the conflict
Before reading about the events below from
nov. 2005, you're recomended to read about the history before the
conflict started. Link
to the history before the conflict.
November 2005 – August 2006; FoH in
taking the law into their own hands
Two of the members of the HDC Board of Directors
are called to the office of K. G. Knutsen, member of the
Board of Directors Friends of Haydom (FoH),
, and told that
FoH has taken over HDC Ltd by appointing
a new all Norwegian Board of Directors with Olaf Myklatun
as chairman. This
Board has again appointed Toralf Rugland as the new
Managing Director. The
same two members of HDC Board were called to the same
office the following day, January 3rd 2006;
this time to meet with the new “Board” and the new
Consultations by telephone with lawyers in
; aimed at explaining that companies in
have to adhere to laws and regulations in
were all in vain.
Managing Director of HDC Ltd, Halvdan Jakobsen, legally
appointed by the Tanzanian Board of Directors, called the
new Medical Director of HLH, Dr Øystein Evjen Olsen (son
of the late Dr Olsen) and informed him about the decision
made by FoH in
. It took him
by surprise; he had not been consulted.
He refused to believe in what he was told.
During the first three month of the year, Dr Øystein
Evjen Olsen apparently tried his best to convince the FoH
that their decision was illegal and not in the interest of
pays the salaries and other costs for the Medical Director
of HLH for 5 years amounting to one million NOK/year (220
million Shs) and a considerable part of both running and
development costs. It
might appear as the Medical Director has been put under
pressure from FoH for yielding to the FoH demands; he
sides with FoH in the issue that by May 2006 has developed
into a conflict about Tanzanian or full Norwegian
ownership and control of Mulbadaw and CMSC. The
HDC Board of Directors turns down by majority vote on 28th
demand from FoH in
to sell shares to Mrs K. E. Olsen that are to be handed
over to third parts in Norway; the transactions and
demands linked to this sale were found to contradict laws
and regulations in Tanzania.
The objective of the transactions was regarded by
the majority of the HDC Board to implement the decision of
complete control of HDC Ltd from
as announced on January 2nd 2006.
August 2006: The
Medical Director of HLH signs a letter giving two
Norwegian citizens of FoH in
, Olaf Myklatun and Toralf Rugland, full authority to run
Mulbadaw Farm and CMSC. Link to the letter here.
August 2006: FoH,
making use of the security guards at HLH and others, armed
with “rungu,” takes physical control of Mulbadaw Farm
and CMSC. All
core assets and non-core assets as including 850 tons of
raw wheat, money in the safe, etc valued at hundred of
millions shillings were seized.
August 2006: Agreement
reached in Arusha that FoH returns all non-core assets,
including the wheat on condition that FoH is not taken to
court by HDC Ltd. The
agreement states that the wheat, 350 tonnes to be used by
HDC for seeds, to be stored at Mulbadaw until at the
latest February 15th 2007.
assets were not included in the Arusha agreement; the FoH
got time up to 15th October 2006 to document
their claim that they were the legal owners to Mulbadaw
and CMSC. FoH
did not meet this demand; title deeds were still in the
name of NAFCO as issued in 1987and no other legal
documentation was produced to this effect.
August 2006 – June 2007; agreements and breach of agreements – High
Court Case Land Division, 22-2006.
seeds stored at Mulbadaw, according to the Arusha agreement, are
seized in December 2006 by RoH (Olaf Myklatun and Toralf Rugland).
the seizure of the seeds belonging to HDC Ltd, HDC Ltd files case
December 2006 with the High Court, Land Division.
The aim is to let the
consider the legality of the actions, mainly the legal ownership
to Mulbadaw Farm and CMSC.
Regional Commissioner of
invites FoH and HDC Ltd to negotiate in her office in February
order to come to an out-of court agreement.
The result is that all issues related to non-core assets
are settled; FoH shall pay for the 350 tons of seeds they seized
within one week; again on condition that HDC Ltd does not take FoH
to court over the issue or let the media know about the agreement.
HDC Ltd halts the proceeding of the case.
decides not to pay as agreed, but offers to release about 100tons
of seeds to HDC Ltd and pay for the remaining.
The payment came almost one month after the agreement; and
the seeds were not released before end of February, so late that
planting could not be done before in March, 6 weeks too late for
planting at the Setchet farm where HDC rented land.
The result was that the crop missed the rains in February,
150mm according to the records, causing a loss for HDC of about
200 million Shs.
2007: Information leaking out from sources close to FoH indicates
that FoH Norway might take the law into their own hands for the
third time and seize the crop at Setchet from HDC Ltd before
Managing Director of HDC Ltd reported to the Board of Directors in
writing the information received.
Case 22-06 was modified and filed again in June
order to obtain a ruling regarding legal ownership to Mulbadaw and
CMSC and as such find a solution according to the laws of
tried in various ways to have HDC Ltd to withdraw the suit; ways
that I shall not detail in this paper partly because they are of a
nature that might need further investigations by others than the
ones this note concerns. It
became more than obvious to the undersigned that FoH did not want
a court ruling that had to be based on the Tanzanian laws.
2007 – June 2008; FoH
has managed, so far, to avoid the Court to consider the legality of their
Farm is operated without having any registration as a company; it
is done by FoH
(Olav Myklatun and Toralf Rugland) in the name of HLH as stated in
letter dated 6th August 2006 and signed by the Medical
Director of HLH. None
of these organizations are legal entities that are allowed to
operate a commercial farm in
ruling by the High Court, Land Division, was expected October 15th
2007; according to information received in June 2007.
The ruling was eventually signed 17th December
2007, and read to the parties on 25th March 2008, more
than 3 months later.
(Olav Myklatun) announced in a church (Klepp) in
in February, one month before he was supposed to be informed about
the ruling, that FoH had “won” the case.
The Liquidator J.
Tadayo had apparently managed to persuade the judge that the
lawyer representing HDC Ltd was not properly appointed by HDC Ltd
to represent HDC Ltd (!); - however; no reference to the
relevant law was made by the judge.
The case is to be dismissed without hearing.
has managed, so far, to avoid the court to consider the legality
of their actions in
and decide who the legal owner to Mulbadaw Farm and CMSC is.
5. Delayed court preseedings.
For various “reasons”,
the court has not been able to make a judgement about who is the rightful
owner to Mulbadaw Farm and CMSC. Neither
judge nor anybody representing SHV or HLH turned up in December 2008 when
the parties were to meet in court; only HDC Ltd met as called.
The case is supposed to be mentioned in April this year; but shall
the court be able to consider the case now?
Status about the lawsuit (30th of June 2009)
hearing vas held in The
High Court - Land Division in Dar es Salam on the 22th of April this
year. The result of this hearing
is aspected to be announced on the 15th of July.
a court ruling i
Arusha was expected on 25th
of June about whether or not to reinstate the
case as to let Tanzanian law rule. It didn't take place, and with the
untimely death of our lawyer HDC might need some time to consider how to
The Board of
Directors of HDC Ltd has not at any point during these years of conflict
changed or modified the original objectives of supporting HLH economically
and with its development activities as outlined in the original Project
I am receiving
information from various persons in
that some representatives of both HLH and FoH are accusing members of the
HDC Ltd to have “stolen” Mulbadaw farm for personal gains.
Such accusations are not only ill-intended but are lies of a nature
that might call for legal actions in order for truth to reign.
I am also
utterly disappointed by the way some of my Tanzanian friends have been
treated and threatened by some representatives of FoH in
; reference is in particular made to letters of eviction and/or threats of
eviction signed by the chairman of the “Haydom Farm” in
official reports, the non-registered entity controlled by FoH
made a loss from farm operations
at Mulbadaw of 327 million Shs from August 2006 to August 2007; - thus
it is difficult to understand how this mode of operation can contribute
anything to HLH or to the local communities.
It is subject to charity and support from
Also read: Summary
of the development of the conflict