Dar es Salaam – The treason trial of CHADEMA national chairperson Tundu Lissu has been plunged into a state of profound disarray, caught first in the grip of a national security crisis and now entangled in a formidable legal battle over the very fundamentals of a fair trial.
The case, already on shaky ground, faces an indefinite postponement following a devastating challenge from the defence against the prosecution’s attempt to use a concealed witness.
The trial’s momentum was first shattered by the historic civil unrest that swept Tanzania after the controversial October 29 general election. Widespread protests, met with a government curfew, army deployment, and an internet shutdown, created an untenable security situation that forced the adjournment of the court’s scheduled November 3 session.
When the High Court finally reconvened on Monday, November 10, the proceedings collapsed before they could begin. Senior State Attorney Thawabu Issa informed the judges that the Tanzania Prisons Service had failed to produce Mr Lissu due to unspecified “security reasons.”
In a further blow to the state’s case, prosecution witnesses travelling from regions across the country were also unable to attend, again citing security concerns. The hearing was adjourned without a single word of testimony.
The drama escalated when the court met again on Wednesday, November 12. In a commanding and meticulously prepared address, Tundu Lissu launched a sweeping legal assault on the prosecution’s plan to call a protected witness, known only as ‘P11’, who was waiting to testify from a concealed booth.
Lissu immediately zeroed in on the bizarre placement of the special booth, or kizimba, arguing that it was positioned such that even the three presiding judges could not see the person inside.
“Your Honours, with my own eyes, the witness there cannot be seen by the judges, and I cannot see him,” Lissu stated, highlighting a direct violation of witness protection rules, which stipulate that only the judge must be able to see a concealed witness.
He pointedly noted that the only individuals with any knowledge of the accuser were “the state attorneys who brought him.”
He then dismantled the very foundation of the witness protection order, contending it had been obtained by the state through “concealment” and on “insufficient grounds.”
He revealed that the prosecution’s original application contained no actual names of the witnesses to be protected, no details of the specific threats they faced, or the nature of those threats. This, he argued, rendered the entire order invalid and fraudulent.
Lissu masterfully wove these procedural flaws into a powerful argument about fundamental rights, framing the use of a faceless, nameless accuser as a terminal breach of the right to a fair trial.
READ MORE: Treason Trial Against Tundu Lissu Adjourned Until Nov. 3 as Prosecution Fails to Produce Witnesses
He passionately argued that a defendant cannot conduct an “effective cross-examination” against a phantom, and that the court itself is crippled, unable to assess the witness’s demeanour and credibility.
“Allowing evidence of this kind will be a mockery of justice,” he declared. “If you allow this procedure that they want to bring here, then we must forget about a fair trial.”
In a final, technical masterstroke, Lissu argued that the 2025 Witness Protection Rules, the very framework enabling the concealed testimony, were not legally in force.
He asserted that the parent legislation had never been properly published in the Government Gazette or tabled in Parliament as required by law, claiming a nationwide search by his legal team had failed to locate a copy in any official repository.
Faced with this multi-layered and devastating challenge, the prosecution was left reeling. State Attorney Nassoro Katuga, appearing overwhelmed, could offer no immediate rebuttal. He instead requested an adjournment, stating the state needed time to prepare a response to the “many, many points” raised.
The court granted the request, adjourning the trial indefinitely. The prosecution now bears the heavy burden of crafting a response capable of salvaging its case.
If they fail to counter Lissu’s arguments, the exclusion of their key witnesses could deliver the final, fatal blow to a treason case that has been crumbling for weeks, leaving it stranded in a legal and political void.
