Dar es Salaam – Three public-spirited citizens in Tanzania have filed an urgent application in the High Court to challenge the legality and composition of the Presidential Commission of Inquiry, which was established to investigate the post-election violence that occurred on October 29, 2025.
Applicants Rosemary Mwakitwange, Edward Heche, and Deogratius Mahinyila are seeking an order for leave to apply for the prerogative writs of Certiorari and Prohibition, which would effectively quash the appointments and prevent the commission from continuing its work.
Crucially, the applicants have also requested an interim order for a stay, which would immediately prohibit the respondents, including the Commission’s members and the Attorney General, from conducting the inquiry pending the hearing and determination of the main application.
The legal filing, brought before the Dar es Salaam Sub-Registry of the High Court, argues that the commission’s appointment by the President, made on November 18, 2025, is fundamentally flawed on grounds of illegality, unreasonableness, bias (natural justice), abuse of discretion, and mala fide.
Central to the claim of illegality is the assertion that the President formed an ‘independent commission of inquiry,’ a body which is allegedly not provided for or contemplated under the governing Commissions of Inquiry Act. The applicants also contend that the appointment was never gazetted and that the mandatory requirement to clearly state the commission’s purpose was violated.
READ MORE: The Full Text of President Samia’s Address at the Launch of the Commission of Inquiry
The challenge on the basis of bias and unreasonableness is particularly potent. The applicants state that the commission members are mostly retired civil servants and former presidential appointees, making them inherently conflicted and unable to investigate actions of sitting or past civil servants, including the appointing authority.
Notably, the Ninth Respondent, Dr Stergomena Lawrence Tax, who was the Minister of Defence and National Service when the violence occurred, is cited as a conflicted party who cannot investigate the conduct of her own ministry.
The suit highlights the President’s prior remarks urging the military to prepare to combat potential election violence in the year of the elections, thereby raising concerns that the appointing authority herself was biased in forming a commission to investigate issues she had already given orders on.
The application further alleges that the entire enterprise is unreasonable because the official subject of the probe, “incidents of uvunjifu wa amani,” (breach of peace), belittles and undermines the core issue of public concern, namely the alleged death of hundreds of Tanzanians, missing persons, and torture that resulted from the violence.
The applicants complain that the commission entirely lacks the representation of young people (Gen-Z) who were the most affected group, instead being wholly composed of older, pensionable, retired civil servants.
The commission’s chairperson, retired Chief Justice Mohamed Chande Othman, and member, retired Chief Justice Ibrahim Hamis Juma, along with retired Inspector General of Police Said Ally Mwema, are cited as having previously served on a commission whose recommendations for reforming the criminal justice system, including disbanding the Police Force, were never implemented.
The application also alleges a mala fide intention on the part of the President, who reportedly stated during the commission’s inauguration that the local body was formed to pre-empt or work alongside any future international investigatory missions.
This sentiment is seen by the applicants as proof of a pre-determined outcome, particularly given the President’s reported instructions to the commission to investigate political opposition and non-governmental organisations (NGOs).
This argument aligns with the mounting pressure from the political opposition and the Catholic Bishops of Tanzania, both of whom have openly called for an independent, non-state-led international inquiry into the deadly post-election events.
The respondents to the application include the Attorney General, all eight appointed commission members, and the Tanganyika Law Society. This case follows an earlier application that was withdrawn with leave to refile due to undisclosed “typographical errors,” and is now slated for an urgent hearing.
The urgency is rooted in the belief that the respondents will continue with the inquiry unless the court intervenes, leading to suffering for the public who seek justice and a full disclosure of the actual cause and extent of the violence.
