Dar es Salaam – The treason trial of CHADEMA national chairperson Tundu Lissu veered towards a potential collapse on Thursday, as the defence systematically dismantled the credibility of the prosecution’s star forensic witness, revealing glaring contradictions between his court testimony and his original police statement.
The day delivered a second consecutive legal defeat for the state, with the court rejecting the witness’s forensic report, while Mr Lissu secured a major victory by entering the witness’s own police statement as evidence, which he then used to devastating effect.
The session began with the court delivering its ruling on the admissibility of Inspector Samwel Kaaya’s 11-page forensic report. In a concise decision, the three-judge bench upheld Mr Lissu’s objection.
The judges agreed with the defence that Inspector Kaaya, having been gazetted specifically for ‘photographic prints and enlargements,’ was only legally empowered to submit a ‘Certificate’ as outlined in the Criminal Procedure Act, not a ‘Report.’ By submitting the latter for video analysis, he acted beyond his legal mandate.
“We do not agree with [state attorney] Mr [John] Mrema that there is a trap and we are not ready to enter the trap he gave us,” the court stated, referencing the prosecution’s argument. “This witness does not have the power to tender this report; he should have tendered a CERTIFICATE.”
READ MORE: Treason Trial Teeters as Court Rejects Key Video Evidence Against Tundu Lissu
With this ruling, the prosecution lost its final piece of expert evidence, leaving it with no forensic report and no physical video exhibits.
Lisssu’s cross-examination
The prosecution then announced it had no further questions for the witness, effectively closing its direct examination. This paved the way for Mr Lissu to begin a cross-examination that would last for hours and methodically undermine the witness’s credibility.
Lissu first successfully applied to have the witness’s original police statement, dated April 8, 2025, admitted into evidence as Exhibit D2. This gave him a definitive baseline against which to compare the witness’s extensive courtroom testimony.
What followed was a forensic deconstruction of the witness’s account. In a painstaking, point-by-point interrogation, Lissu asked Inspector Kaaya to confirm whether key elements of his court testimony were present in his original statement.
To over 75 separate questions, the witness was forced to repeatedly admit: “They are not there,” “I did not write that,” or “I did not say that.”
READ MORE: Tundu Lissu’s Treason Trial Hangs in the Balance as Judges Set to Rule on Critical Evidence
The omissions from his police statement were comprehensive and damning, including:
- His educational background and specialised training in South Africa and India.
- Critical details of the forensic process, such as the ‘First In, First Out’ procedure, the use of a police notebook, and advanced analyses like ‘Chron Analysis’ for ‘deep fakes,’ ‘Noise Analysis,’ and ‘Sensory Pattern Analysis.’
- References to the ‘covering letter,’ ‘laboratory book register,’ and internal office ‘Dokezo 70’ that he cited in court as part of his procedure.
- The specific alleged seditious phrases from the video he quoted to the judges.
When pressed on why these crucial details were absent, the witness could only offer what legal analysts may describe as a weak explanation that his police statement was merely a “summary.”
The core of the allegation
Lissu further cornered the witness on the core of the treason allegation. Inspector Kaaya confirmed that his analysis could not identify who uploaded the video to the Jambo TV YouTube channel. More critically, when Lissu asked if a person could upload a video without the channel’s password or engage in hacking, the witness stated it was impossible:
Lissu: “So, it’s either you have a password, a password cracker, or you are hacking?”
Kaaya: “That is correct.”
Lissu: “Do I have the password?”
Kaaya: “I did not say you have it, and I don’t know.”
Lissu: “Did I do any hacking?”
Kaaya: “You did not.”
This exchange directly contradicted the implicit thrust of the prosecution’s case, which holds Lissu responsible for the video’s publication.
Evaporating credibility
As the witness’s credibility evaporated, Lissu turned to classic Swahili proverbs, asking if he had ever heard the sayings: Maneno matupu hayavunji mfupa (Empty words do not break bones), mkono mtupu haulambwi (A bare hand is not licked), and Mali bila daftari hupotea bila habari (Property without a ledger is lost without a trace).
READ MORE: Treason Trial Gripped by Legal Fireworks as Lissu Challenges Evidence Admissibility
When the witness admitted he had not, Lissu delivered the masterful quip: “Then you should know that your words here in court have been lost without a trace.”
The observation drew roaring laughter from the gallery.
After the marathon cross-examination, a visibly disoriented prosecution requested an adjournment until Friday, ostensibly to “continue deliberations,” raising speculation about the future of their case.
When the court resumed after a short recess, Mr Lissu made a bold declaration to those around him, signalling his belief that the state’s case had been legally defeated. “From today,” he stated, “I will only remain in jail because of the October 29 election. This case is finished.”
The trial will resume on Friday, October 24, 2025, at 9:00 AM. With its evidence in tatters and its key witness severely compromised, the state faces a monumental task to revive its case, with many observers questioning whether the treason charge can legally proceed.
