ع
Tanzania’s High Court in Dar es Salaam delivered the split verdict on November 6 2026 after a trial that lasted nearly 19 months with a three-judge panel led by Justice Dunstan Ndunguru ruling that the prosecution failed to prove the key element of intent to intimidate the government required for treason according to Reuters. The 58-year-old chairperson of the main opposition Chadema party who has been detained since April 2025 immediately indicated through his lawyers that he would appeal the incitement conviction to the Court of Appeal which is the country’s highest court. Prosecutors had built their case on a speech Lissu gave while campaigning under the slogan No Reforms No Election in which they said he told supporters the opposition would block the election and mobilise rebellion a claim he has always denied as politically motivated.
The treason charge which can carry the death penalty dated back to Lissu’s arrest on April 9 2025 in Mbinga shortly after he addressed a Chadema rally demanding changes to the electoral system ahead of the October 2025 general election a sequence detailed in reporting by The Citizen newspaper. A commission appointed by President Samia Suluhu Hassan reported in April 2026 that at least 518 people were killed during protests that erupted after Lissu’s arrest and the disqualification of Chadema candidates with the panel blaming the demonstrators while human rights groups cited by Reuters alleged excessive force by security services. The unrest undermined Tanzania’s longstanding reputation for stability and drew international scrutiny that has continued through the trial period.
President Samia Suluhu Hassan won the 2025 election with 98 percent of the vote after the two main opposition challengers including Lissu were excluded from the ballot a result that Chadema dismissed as a mockery of democracy according to the BBC. Her government has repeatedly denied targeting opponents or using the judiciary for political ends while insisting the case against Lissu rested on evidence of incitement rather than protected speech. The conviction on the lesser charge which can carry a prison term of up to five years will be followed by a separate sentencing hearing at a date yet to be set.
Lissu a former member of parliament for Singida East has been a persistent critic of the ruling party for more than a decade and survived an assassination attempt in 2017 during which he was shot 16 times as documented in coverage by AP News. He has spent periods in exile citing threats to his life and went on a brief hunger strike in late October 2026 to protest restrictions on private consultations with his lawyers before prison authorities allowed the meeting according to Al Jazeera. His legal team argued throughout the trial that the charges violated constitutional guarantees of free speech and that the case formed part of a pattern of harassment against Chadema.
The United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention concluded in February 2026 that Lissu’s detention was arbitrary and that restrictions on his freedom of expression were disproportionate a finding referenced in analysis by The Africa Report. Amnesty International accused the government last week of continuing a crackdown by weaponising counterterrorism and other laws to silence critics and instil fear though authorities did not respond to requests for comment from the BBC. Chadema officials have described the proceedings as a test of judicial independence that will determine whether dissent and calls for electoral reform remain legitimate political activity in Tanzania.
The verdict arrives as regional observers monitor Tanzania’s political trajectory following the contested 2025 poll with some analysts noting that an appeal process could extend the case into 2027. Lissu who also serves as vice chairman of Chadema maintains that his remarks fell within the bounds of legitimate political mobilisation and has rejected any suggestion that they constituted a threat to state security. Court records cited across multiple outlets including The Chanzo indicate that 17 state witnesses testified but the panel ultimately determined that the evidence did not meet the threshold for the more serious offence.
