Dar es Salaam – The legal battle in the treason trial of Tanzanian opposition leader Tundu Lissu intensified on Thursday, as government prosecutors presented their arguments against Lissu’s bid to have the case dismissed.
The prosecution maintained that the charge sheet is valid and that Lissu’s spoken words can be considered an “overt act” of treason, while Lissu’s defence continued to attack the procedural foundation of the case.
In a session dedicated to the prosecution’s response to Lissu’s second preliminary objection, – the validity of the charge sheet – a team of seven government lawyers, led by state attorney Nassoro Katuga, argued that the charge sheet meets all legal requirements under Tanzanian law.
Katuga cited Section 138 of the Criminal Procedure Act, arguing that the charges were written in ordinary language and provided sufficient particulars for Lissu to understand the offence.
Katuga referenced the 1971 case of Mataka & Others v. R to outline the three essential elements of treason: allegiance to the Republic, formation of a necessary intent, and the manifestation of that intent through an “overt act.” The prosecution argued that Lissu’s public statements fulfilled this third requirement.
READ MORE: Tanzanian Court Adjourns Lissu Treason Trial Amid Renewed Tensions Over Courtroom Access
They further contended that under Section 39 of the Penal Code, the use of the word “or” allows for a broad interpretation of what constitutes a treasonous act, including inciting, encouraging, or persuading others.
The prosecution also defended the witness statements, which Lissu had argued were procedurally flawed because several police officers had written their own statements. The government lawyers maintained that the statements were properly recorded and admissible as evidence.
In his rejoinder, Tundu Lissu, who is representing himself, systematically dismantled the prosecution’s arguments. He reiterated his position that spoken words do not constitute “publication” under the law, which he argued requires writing or printing.
He challenged the prosecution to show where in the charge sheet it is alleged that he published any written material.
Lissu also doubled down on his critique of the witness statements, citing legal precedents from Judge Nyalali and the Court of Appeal to argue that the self-written statements by police officers were a clear violation of established legal procedure.
He argued that these procedural errors were not minor defects but were “incurable,” rendering the evidence invalid and the entire case unsustainable.
“To say we should wait for the witnesses is pointless, because the evidence is not confirmed and simply isn’t there,” Lissu argued, referencing the flawed statements. He insisted that, based on established Court of Appeal precedent, a defective charge sheet cannot be amended and must be quashed.
The highly technical legal arguments on Thursday have set the stage for a critical ruling from the three-judge panel. The court is scheduled to reconvene on Monday, September 22, 2025, to deliver its decision on Lissu’s preliminary objections based on the arguments presented by both parties.
The court must decide whether the procedural objections raised by Lissu are significant enough to dismiss the case before it proceeds to a full trial on the merits. The decision will have significant implications for the interpretation of treason laws and the rules of evidence in Tanzania.
The trial continues to be a focal point of political tension in the country, occurring just weeks before the general election scheduled for October 29, 2025. The case is being closely watched by key observers as a test of the independence of the judiciary and the state of democratic freedoms in Tanzania.
