Lissu was charged the day after his arrest with making statements during a party rally that allegedly threatened to disrupt the 2025 general election. The charge sheet alleges no use of weapons, no organized plan, no financial transactions, and no acts of violence. The alleged offense consists solely of rhetoric in which Lissu stated that without electoral reform, the party would “disrupt this election” and make things “stink badly.” The prosecution seeks the death penalty for these verbal statements.
The trial has been marked by significant procedural controversies. In October 2025, the court ruled that the primary objective evidence of the speech—a video recording stored on a flash disk and memory card, along with its forensic report—was inadmissible. Consequently, none of the 11 listed exhibits were admitted into evidence. The only prosecution witness present in the courtroom testified that he filmed, broadcast, and shared the speech. The remainder of the prosecution’s case rests on testimony from anonymous witnesses; nine of the 17 witnesses testified under pseudonyms under rules gazetted three months after Lissu’s arrest. Initially, these witnesses testified from a box that concealed their identities even from the judges.
Legal experts and human rights organizations have criticized the proceedings as a tool of political repression. Hussein Khalid, CEO of Vocal Africa, stated that a guilty verdict would effectively remove the opposition’s primary leader, undermining demands for good governance and human rights. Khalid described the case as lacking merit and characterized it as an attempt to silence the opposition. Amnesty International reported that supporters of Lissu were violently arrested, with some alleging sexual torture, while international legal observers were detained and deported.
The defense has argued that the prosecution fails to meet the legal threshold for treason. In August, the bench found a case to answer in a brief ruling, which critics noted ignored a 1996 Court of Appeal precedent in Hatibu Gandhi v Republic, which established that words alone do not constitute an overt act of treason. The UN Working Group on Arbitrary Detention found in February 2026 that Lissu’s detention was arbitrary. Additionally, the court recently ordered a nationwide circular to protect confidential consultations between prisoners and lawyers after prison officers were found to be eavesdropping on these meetings in violation of the 1968 Prisons Regulations.
Lissu has maintained his innocence, citing threats to his life that led to periods of exile following a 2017 assassination attempt in which he survived 16 bullet wounds. In late October, he threatened a hunger strike in protest against prison authorities’ alleged refusal to allow private lawyer consultations. The outcome of the November 6 ruling will determine whether Lissu is acquitted or sentenced to death, a decision that will significantly impact Tanzania’s political landscape and its international reputation regarding judicial independence.
