Dodoma – The High Court has ruled that a constitutional petition challenging the 90-day suspension of the popular social networking platform JamiiForums will proceed to a full hearing.
The court dismissed preliminary objections raised by the government, marking a significant moment for digital rights in Tanzania. The ruling, delivered on March 16, 2026, allows an individual user to challenge regulatory actions that restrict access to digital platforms.
On September 6, 2025, the Tanzania Communications Regulatory Authority (TCRA) suspended the license of Vapper Tech Limited, the operator of JamiiForums, for 90 days.
The regulator accused the platform of publishing misleading content that allegedly disrespected President Samia Suluhu Hassan and the government.
The flagged material reportedly involved comments by former diplomat Humphrey Polepole regarding a visit by a Zimbabwean businessman, Wicknell Chivayo, to the State House.
READ MORE: JamiiForums Founder Warns of ‘Killing Local Innovation’ Following 90-Day TCRA Ban
The suspension drew widespread condemnation from civil society organisations and international press freedom advocates, who viewed it as a suppression of public discourse ahead of the general elections.
The legal challenge
Fortunatus Boniphace Buyobe, a verified user of the platform, filed a constitutional case against Vapper Tech Limited, the TCRA, and the Attorney General.
Buyobe argued that the suspension violated his fundamental rights to seek, receive, and impart information. He claimed it infringed upon his freedom of communication and his right to hold opinions and express ideas.
He also challenged the constitutionality of several provisions of the Electronic and Postal Communications (Online Content) Regulations, 2020, arguing they were overly broad and ambiguous.
The government, represented by Principal State Attorney Vivian Method, raised three preliminary points of law to have the petition dismissed.
Method argued that Buyobe failed to exhaust alternative remedies. She contended that he should have appealed to the Fair Competition Tribunal under the TCRA Act before approaching the High Court.
She also argued that the petition was res judicata—a matter already judged. She pointed out that the constitutionality of the online content regulations had been determined in a previous case involving activist Deus Valentine Rweyemamu.
The constitutional petition challenged Tanzania’s 2020 Online Content Regulations (as amended in 2022) for allegedly violating the rights to freedom of expression, a fair hearing, and work.
The High Court dismissed most of the claims, ruling that the contested provisions—including definitions of hate speech, licensing rules, and prohibited content—were clear and served legitimate regulatory purposes without unconstitutionally restricting rights.
Finally, Method asserted that Buyobe lacked locus standi, or legal standing. She argued that the suspension affected Vapper Tech Limited’s license, and therefore, only the company could pursue the matter.
Petitioner’s arguments
Buyobe’s lawyer, John Seka, countered the government’s objections. Seka argued that the appeal remedy under the TCRA Act was only available to licensees who had a contractual relationship with the regulator, not to individual users like Buyobe.
He distinguished the current case from the Rweyemamu decision. Seka noted that while the previous case dealt with the constitutionality of the regulations in the abstract, Buyobe was challenging the specific application of those regulations to his personal rights.
Regarding legal standing, Seka maintained that Buyobe’s affidavit clearly demonstrated how the suspension personally affected him, meeting the legal requirements to bring the petition.
Court’s reasoning
A panel of three judges—A. J. Kirekiano, L. M. Mongella, and H. A. Kinyaka—delivered the ruling at the Main Registry in Dodoma.
On the issue of alternative remedies, the court agreed with Seka. The judges noted that the appeal mechanism under the TCRA Act was intended for parties to the regulatory decision.
They reasoned that subjecting Buyobe to a remedy where he would be a “stranger” would be ineffective and deny him access to justice.
Regarding the claim that the matter had already been judged, the court found that determining this required an evaluation of factual issues and evidence, which was premature at the preliminary stage.
READ MORE:Financial Struggles Threaten Journalistic Independence Ahead of Tanzania’s 2025 Elections
The judges noted: “The plea of res judicata is founded on proof of certain facts and then by applying the law to the facts so found. It is, therefore, necessary that the foundation for the plea must be laid in the pleadings and then an issue must be framed and tried.”
On the question of legal standing, the court examined Buyobe’s affidavit.Buyobe had stated that he regularly contributed to and received information from JamiiForums. He explained that its sudden inaccessibility prevented him from posting or reading content.
The court found this sufficient to demonstrate personal impact.The judges stated: “Requiring the Petitioners to state more than what they did is to go beyond the law and tantamount to determining the petition on merit, which is not our domain, at this juncture.”
Decision
The court overruled all three preliminary objections raised by the government.The judges found the petition competent and ordered that it be heard and decided on its merits.
The decision paves the way for a substantive examination of whether the government’s suspension of the platform violated the constitutional rights of its users.
