On May 8, 2025, the European Parliament passed a resolution expressing concern over the arrest and prosecution of CHADEMA national chairperson, Tundu Lissu. The resolution called for his “immediate and unconditional” release, accusing the Tanzanian government of politically motivated repression and warning of consequences for European Union (EU) – Tanzania relations if what it termed “democratic backsliding” persists.
While the resolution frames its concerns in the language of human rights and democratic principles, it represents a blatant intrusion into Tanzania’s sovereign judicial processes. Most notably, it prejudges an active court case without reviewing evidence or seeking clarification from Tanzanian authorities.
I’m happy that Tanzania responded to this call with the urgency it needed, with the country’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs and East African Cooperation describing it as based on “incomplete or partisan information” and as “an inappropriate interference in the country’s internal affairs.”
However, as a Tanzanian political analyst who follows international relations closely, I found it pertinent to take the government’s analysis further by considering the political, legal, and ethical implications of the European Parliament’s resolution, highlighting the broader geopolitical hypocrisy that accompanies such selective foreign criticisms.
But first, I’d like to resolve the confusion that I’ve observed many Tanzanian commentators display in their discussions about the resolution and its perceived impacts. Many conflate the European Commission with the European Parliament. However, these are two different institutions with distinct roles.
The European Commission, on the one hand, is the EU’s executive branch. It drafts legislation, manages policies, and represents the Union in international diplomacy. It holds decision-making power regarding the EU’s external relations and can negotiate agreements.
READ MORE: EU Parliament Debates the Arrest of Tanzanian Opposition Leader Tundu Lissu
The European Parliament, on the other hand, is a legislative body composed of directly elected representatives, known as Members of the European Parliament (MEPs), from member states. It primarily passes non-binding resolutions, offers recommendations, and controls the EU budget.
Crucially, resolutions from the European Parliament are political statements without legal binding force. The May 8 resolution on Tanzania is thus a symbolic political message rather than an official EU foreign policy mandate. This, however, doesn’t prevent us from discussing its implications not only on the importance of the rule of law but also on bilateral relations between countries.
Judicial independence
The resolution, as briefly stated above, demands the “immediate and unconditional release” of Tundu Lissu. Now, this effectively ignores the presumption of innocence and the independence of the judiciary—cornerstones of justice systems worldwide.
Lissu’s case is before Tanzanian courts, with due legal processes underway. No verdict has been issued. By pronouncing judgment prematurely, the European Parliament not only disrespects Tanzania’s judicial institutions but also violates principles of international law that uphold state sovereignty over internal affairs.
This behaviour sets a troubling precedent. If foreign legislatures feel empowered to overrule national courts arbitrarily, global legal order risks descending into chaos, where law is replaced by political expediency.
While the European Parliament aggressively criticises Tanzania, it routinely ignores or downplays serious political and social crises within Europe itself. This selective outrage undermines its credibility and exposes a patronising mindset toward Africa.
For example, we haven’t seen European lawmakers issuing a resolution against German authorities to designate the Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) party, a major political force in Germany known for its nationalist rhetoric and right-wing populism, as a “right-wing extremist” group.
Is this not an attack on political pluralism and democracy itself? Can anyone imagine Tanzania designating any opposition party as “extremist” and the move would pass without condemnation from the European Parliament? I doubt it.
Double standards
But the lack of consistent action speaks volumes about political tolerance within Europe for dangerous domestic actors, while simultaneously condemning Tanzania on arguably less substantial grounds.
And that’s not all. Since 2023, farmers across several EU countries, including Germany, France, the Netherlands, Poland, and Belgium, have engaged in sustained protests over environmental regulations, fuel prices, and competition from cheap imports.
These protests have occasionally turned violent. Dutch farmers famously clashed with police over nitrogen emission policies that threatened their livelihoods, while French farmers blocked highways and staged demonstrations in Paris. German farmers, too, rallied in Berlin to voice their grievances.
This unrest represents one of the largest economic and social disruptions in recent European history. Yet, the European Parliament has been largely silent, choosing not to address these legitimate concerns with urgency or legislative action. Meanwhile, it focuses its energy on politically policing Tanzania.
READ MORE: Nationalists’ Victory In European Elections Reflects the Failures of Globalist Liberal Agenda
And how about the growing xenophobic trends currently present in several European countries at the moment, with several EU member states, including Italy, Greece, and Hungary, having come under criticism for inhumane treatment of migrants and refugees, including pushbacks at borders and overcrowded detention centres?
Simultaneously, anti-immigrant political parties have gained traction, fanning xenophobia and undermining Europe’s commitments under the 1951 Refugee Convention. Deportations have increased, and calls to restrict asylum rights have intensified.
Despite these grave challenges, the European Parliament has failed to formulate comprehensive policies to address migration humanely and effectively. Its unwillingness to hold member states accountable for human rights violations contrasts starkly with its posture toward Tanzania.
Instead of acting as a constructive actor tackling these complex challenges, the European Parliament diverts its limited attention and credibility by interfering in Tanzania’s internal affairs—a sovereign nation with its own functioning judicial system.
Long-standing relations
It is important to emphasize that Tanzania cherishes its long-standing relationship with Europe, built on decades of cooperation, trade, development aid, and cultural exchange. Since independence in 1960s, Tanzania has enjoyed positive diplomatic relations with many European countries, including the United Kingdom, Germany, the Netherlands, Sweden, and Finland.
Notably, the ongoing visit by Finland’s President Alexander Stubb to Tanzania underscores the deepening partnership between the two nations.
READ MORE: President Stubb, President Samia Discuss the ‘New Global Order’
During this visit, Tanzania and Finland signed multiple bilateral agreements aimed at enhancing cooperation in key sectors such as education, technology transfer, environmental sustainability, and infrastructure development. The agreements reflect Finland’s commitment to support Tanzania’s socio-economic transformation while respecting its sovereignty and development priorities.
These partnerships are based on mutual respect, recognising Tanzania’s sovereignty and prioritising collaboration rather than interference. The United Nations Charter explicitly protects the sovereignty of states, particularly in Article 2(7), which prohibits UN intervention in matters essentially within domestic jurisdiction.
This principle extends to other international norms and treaties, underscoring Tanzania’s right to manage its internal affairs without external coercion. Tanzania’s judiciary, constitutionally independent, must be allowed to conduct fair trials without external pressure or political grandstanding.
Tanzania remains committed to democracy, justice, and human rights within its constitutional framework. We respect the rule of law and welcome constructive dialogue with international partners, including the European Union.
However, Tanzania unequivocally rejects the European Parliament’s politically motivated interference in its judicial processes. Let the courts judge, let reformers speak, and let diplomats learn that genuine partnership respects boundaries.
Thomas Joel Kibwana is an international relations and business development expert. He is available at thomasjkibwana@gmail.com or on X as @thomasjkibwana. The opinions expressed here are the writer’s own and do not necessarily reflect those of The Chanzo. If you are interested in publishing in this space, please contact our editors at editor@thechanzo.com.
