Dar es Salaam – The High Court treason trial of opposition leader Tundu Lissu continued its pattern of devastating cross-examinations on Monday, February 16, 2026, as two more prosecution witnesses saw their credibility systematically dismantled by the self-representing defendant, drawing repeated bursts of laughter from the packed courtroom.
The seventh and eighth prosecution witnesses took the stand, but both left with their testimonies severely compromised after facing Mr Lissu’s methodical questioning. By the end of the day, the defence had submitted five exhibits to the court, whilst the prosecution remained unable to present a single accepted exhibit.
The first witness of the day, a 38-year-old electrical technician from Songea who testified as ‘P2,’ claimed he had been inspired by a YouTube video of Mr Lissu to participate in disrupting the 2025 election.
He testified that he contributed Sh10,000 to a CHADEMA fund-raising campaign of Tone Tone, and participated in planning a rally that was subsequently shut down by police.
However, under Mr Lissus cross-examination, the witness’s story fell apart. Lissu had his police statement from April 24, 2025, admitted as evidence and systematically compared what the witness said in court to what was recorded in that statement.
READ MORE: Laughter in Court as Lissu Dismantles Witnesses in Treason Trial
Tundu Lissu: You said on April 22 you were taken to the Central Police Station in Songea to have your statement taken. Now look at your statement and tell the judges if you said anything about that date?
Witness P2: I haven’t mentioned anything except a signature.
Tundu Lissu: So it’s not there?
Witness P2: It’s there.
Tundu Lissu: Is there a date ‘April 22’ anywhere?
Witness P2: It’s not there.
Tundu Lissu: Is there anywhere you mentioned the Central Police Station, the main police station?
Witness P2: I didn’t mention it.
When Lissu asked about the witness’s understanding of how the election would be stopped, the witness admitted he did not know. This prompted laughter from the gallery.
READ MORE:Chaos in Court as Lissu Denied Food; Judge Intervenes in Dramatic Treason Trial Hearing
Lissu then challenged the witness on his credibility as a CHADEMA member:
Tundu Lissu: Do CHADEMA followers have marks on their faces?
Witness P2: I don’t know.
Tundu Lissu: Do you have a card?
Witness P2: No.
Tundu Lissu: How will the judges know? Tell me, how will we know if you’re not chawa wa mama [a president’s supporter]?
Witness P2: I don’t know.
When Lissu questioned whether going to party offices to get an explanation about why the chairperson had been arrested constituted a crime, the witness again admitted ignorance, drawing more laughter.
Tundu Lissu: So you were arrested without having committed any crime?
Witness P2: I don’t know.
The witness’s police statement was accepted as Exhibit D6 (Defence Exhibit No. 6).
Fruit vendor’s confused account
The second witness, a 26-year-old fruit vendor from Moshi testifying as ‘P8,’ claimed he had seen Lissu on YouTube and Facebook and was inspired to incite others to cause rebellion. However, his testimony was equally riddled with contradictions.
When Lissu asked the witness to identify his phone in his police statement, the witness could not do so. When asked where in his statement he mentioned watching YouTube, the witness was silent.
READ MORE: Court Hands Tundu Lissu Partial Victory in Secret Witness Battle, Trial to Proceed
When asked where he mentioned being taken to the RCO office and held in remand, the witness admitted: “It’s not there.”
The most memorable exchange came when Lissu read a passage from the witness’s own statement:
Tundu Lissu: Read aloud what inspired me to incite you.
Witness P8: Read me…
Tundu Lissu: P8 said I hated CCM’s theft of the election in the election, and we party members didn’t agree with such things, and that’s why we’re opposed to them. Is that yours?
Witness P8: Yes, that’s mine.
Tundu Lissu: You said you were waiting for my statement after that speech.
Witness P8: It’s true.
Tundu Lissu: So, from when you saw that video until today, have you ever seen that statement from Lissu?
Witness P8: He hasn’t given it until today because it’s criminal.
When Lissu pointed out that the witness had joined the movement before Lissu even gave the alleged statement, the witness became defensive:
Tundu Lissu: Now, you are my member, I must tease you here. Let me finish, and you can leave.
Witness P8: I’m not your member. Because you see, these things are good. I never expected that one day I would come here.
When asked about his case and whether it had been opened, the witness revealed that despite being arrested on charges of rebellion, no case had been formally opened against him.
READ MORE:Tundu Lissu’s Treason Trial Resumes With Fierce Legal Debate Over ‘Secret Witness’
He added, with apparent resignation: “They arrested me as a young person, and I thank God I’m safe. The government has a very long arm.”
The witness’s statement was accepted as Exhibit D7 (Defence Exhibit No. 7).
Prosecution’s struggle
By the end of Monday’s proceedings, the defence had successfully submitted five exhibits to the court (D3 through D7), all of which were police statements from prosecution witnesses that Lissu had used to impeach their credibility.
The prosecution, meanwhile, had still not managed to have a single exhibit accepted by the court. Their earlier attempts to submit a video of Lissu speaking and an expert report on the video had both been rejected.
The prosecution requested an adjournment, citing the need to prepare additional witnesses. Judge Ndunguru ordered the case to resume on Tuesday, February 17, 2026, at 4:00 AM, and sternly instructed the prosecution to come with sufficient witnesses.
The trial has now heard testimony from eight prosecution witnesses, with the defence systematically exposing contradictions and weaknesses in each account.
The courtroom observers noted that the prosecution team, which had arrived at 9:05 AM on Monday, appeared to have expected a more straightforward day of testimony—but instead found themselves watching their case crumble under the rigorous questioning of the self-representing defendant.
