Tanzania’s High Court acquitted opposition leader Tundu Lissu of treason on Friday, 6 November, and sentenced him to four years in prison after convicting him of incitement. The decision in Dar es Salaam brought the treason trial to an end at first instance. Chadema, the party Lissu chairs, said it intended to appeal the ruling and seek his release on bail while the appeal is considered.

The case concerned remarks Lissu made on 3 April 2025 during Chadema’s campaign pressing for electoral reforms ahead of that year’s general election. The Chanzo reported that prosecutors alleged he intended to mobilise people to obstruct the election as a means of intimidating the government. Lissu denied wrongdoing. His defence argued that the remarks had to be understood in the context of the party’s campaign for changes to the electoral system.

How the judges separated the two offences

The three-judge panel, led by Justice Dunstan Ndunguru, found that the prosecution had failed to establish the intention necessary for treason, according to courtroom reporting by The Citizen and The Chanzo. The finding went to the purpose prosecutors attributed to Lissu’s words. The judges concluded that the evidence did not establish the alleged intent to intimidate the government.

The panel separately concluded that remarks encouraging obstruction of the election amounted to incitement. According to The Citizen’s account of the judgment, the judges cited section 319 of the Criminal Procedure Act when dealing with the lesser offence and section 390 of the Penal Code for the incitement conviction. The official editions of both laws provide the statutory context. The distinction matters to understanding the outcome. The judges rejected the allegation on which the original charge depended and reached a different finding on what the remarks encouraged.

At sentencing, state attorney Nassoro Katuga acknowledged that Lissu had no previous convictions, The Citizen reported. He sought a penalty that reflected the seriousness of the offence and would deter similar conduct. Lissu objected to being convicted of an offence he had not originally faced and argued that the decision was politically motivated, The Citizen reported. The court said the procedural law allowed it to reach a verdict on the lesser offence. Chadema’s chief legal officer, Rugemeleza Nshala, questioned the four-year term, pointing to the lengthy period Lissu had already spent in custody. That criticism is the party’s position. How a reviewing court deals with the time in custody would depend on the proceedings that follow.

What the appeal could clarify

The court declined Lissu’s request for bail at sentencing. The Citizen reported that the judge said he could apply once an appeal had been lodged. Nshala told journalists on Friday that the legal team would consult Lissu and prepare an appeal and bail application. Reuters separately reported the party’s intention to appeal. An announced application leaves the practical issue of release unresolved. The next records to watch are any filing that identifies the grounds of appeal and any court order on bail or the sentence.

The difference between a verdict and the consequences that flow from it matters for voters as well. An acquittal can settle one serious allegation at trial while a conviction on another offence leaves the defendant in prison. For Chadema, that means a legal challenge and the immediate question of how the party organises with its chair in custody. For people following the case from outside Tanzania, it means reports that mention only the acquittal or only the sentence give an incomplete account of the same hearing.

The case arose from a dispute over the conditions for taking part in an election. RIM’s coverage of special voting and ballot delays in Cape Town concerns a different country and different facts, with a related emphasis on the rules and processes that shape participation. In Tanzania, the question after Friday is how the courts will address the opposition leader’s challenge to a conviction arising from his election-period speech. The timing and scope of any appeal will determine when that question is examined again.

*Featured image: AI-generated conceptual illustration for RIM.*

Why this matters

The judgment shows how one prosecution can end in both an acquittal and a prison sentence. For Tanzanians at home and abroad, the next court filings could clarify how the conviction affects an opposition leader’s ability to take part in public life and how courts assess speech calling for disruption of an election.

Sources

Topics: Tanzania · Tundu Lissu · Chadema · Dar es Salaam · High Court · Electoral reform

← All news & insights