Tanzania’s High Court has ruled that Chadema party chairman Tundu Lissu must present a formal defense in his treason trial, a charge that carries a maximum penalty of death if he is convicted.

The ruling is not a conviction. At this stage of a criminal trial, the court is only deciding whether the prosecution has produced evidence that, left unanswered, could support a conviction. It is not a final determination of guilt, nor a detailed assessment of witness credibility.

From “No Reforms, No Election” to a treason charge

The case goes back to Chadema’s nationwide “No Reforms, No Election” campaign, which called for changes to Tanzania’s electoral system ahead of the October 2025 general election. The specific charge centers on remarks Lissu allegedly made at a Chadema meeting in Dar es Salaam on April 3, 2025, when he called for the election to be halted unless fundamental electoral reforms were enacted. Prosecutors allege this amounted to an attempt to intimidate state institutions and obstruct the election through unlawful means.

Lissu was arrested on April 9, 2025, after addressing a Chadema rally, and was charged with treason the following day, along with a separate charge over publishing false information online. He has denied the allegations, framing the prosecution as a political dispute stemming from his campaign for constitutional and electoral reform. International legal and human-rights groups criticized the arrest, arguing the charges appeared tied to his political activity and describing it as part of a crackdown on the opposition and freedom of expression.

Under Tanzania’s Penal Code, treason carries the death penalty. Section 39 covers acts such as attempting to unlawfully depose the president, overthrow the government, or intimidate the executive, legislature, or judiciary, provided the required intent is shown through an overt act or publication.

The legal threshold for treason?

Lissu’s legal team argued the prosecution’s evidence didn’t meet the threshold needed to compel a defense, and asked the court to acquit him at this “no-case-to-answer” stage. The court rejected that submission.

Tanzanian lawyer Alphonce Lusako, speaking to BreakThrough News, explained that the weight of the ruling must be understood within the specific legal requirements of a treason charge: “This is a capital offense case, a very significant one here in Tanzania. It’s a criminal case. The prosecution set out what are called the ‘issues’, or the ingredients of the case, because in a treason charge there are specific elements that must be established.”

Adding, that treason is not simply a charge that can be established by showing that an opposition politician made controversial political statements, the prosecution must demonstrate the specific conduct and intention required by law. “For example, if a person is accused of treason, they might be charged with killing the president, attempting to kill the president, or unlawfully overthrowing the government.”

According to Lusako, this distinction was key to the defense case. He said questions arose over whether the prosecution had established the specific elements required to prove treason.

He said another critical issue was whether the prosecution had established the necessary intention to commit treason, “A second issue was that no intent to commit treason was established.”

For the defense, this became the basis for arguing the prosecution had failed to meet the required criminal standard. Lusako said the prosecution is required to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, and the defense argued the evidence presented did not sufficiently establish the ingredients of treason. The defense subsequently submitted a no-case-to-answer argument, asking the court to terminate the case without requiring Lissu to defend himself; “In criminal procedure, when the defence sees that the prosecution has struggled to make its case, it can submit a motion of ‘no case to answer’. That’s what happened here, the defence closed its submissions and argued that the prosecution had not proven its case.”

The High Court, however, rejected that submission and determined that Lissu had a case to answer.

Lusako stressed the significance of that distinction. The ruling, he explained, does not mean the prosecution has proved treason or that the court has found Lissu guilty, “Importantly, this was not a conviction, and it was not a finding of guilt at that stage, the court did not rule on guilt at this point or any conviction.”

The ruling therefore moves the trial into its next phase. Lissu must now respond to the prosecution’s evidence, he has said he will defend himself and call witnesses, reportedly including President Samia Suluhu Hassan, former Vice-President Philip Mpango, former Prime Minister Kassim Majaliwa, and the heads of the police and intelligence services, before judges consider both sides and ultimately determine whether the charge has been proven to the required standard.

Read more: Post-election repression in Tanzania as President Suluhu “wins” with 97.66%

The trial is unfolding against a turbulent political situation. Samia Suluhu Hassan was declared winner of the October 29, 2025 presidential election, but the vote was marred by severe restrictions on opposition activity and widespread violence, with security forces reportedly using lethal force against protesters. A government-appointed commission later reported 518 deaths across 11 regions in connection with the unrest, while cautioning that the figure might not be conclusive.

For Lissu’s defense, the battle going forward is whether his political advocacy, including the “No Reforms, No Election” campaign, can legally satisfy the elements of treason. More broadly, his prosecution has become part of a much larger debate over political freedoms, opposition politics, and the rule of law in Tanzania.

From BT News via This RSS Feed.