Dar es Salaam – A coalition of 14 civil society organisations has issued a detailed critique of the presidential commission’s investigation into the October 2025 violence, arguing that methodological flaws, missing perpetrator identification, and incomplete analysis undermine the report’s credibility and capacity to deliver accountability.
Four days after retired Chief Justice Mohamed Chande Othman presented the commission’s findings to President Samia Suluhu Hassan on April 23, 2026, the coalition released a comprehensive analysis questioning the investigation’s scientific rigour and its ability to serve as a basis for justice.
The coalition argues that whilst the commission identified important root causes, critical gaps prevent meaningful accountability.
Coalition members include the Legal and Human Rights Centre (LHRC), Tanganyika Law Society (TLS), Centre for Strategic Litigation (CSL), Twaweza East Africa, and ten other organisations spanning human rights, governance, gender equality, and civic education sectors.
Methodological concerns
The coalition’s primary criticism concerns the commission’s evidence-gathering approach. The groups contend that relying on official sources—particularly police and health facilities—to investigate events in which police are accused of being primary perpetrators creates inherent credibility problems.
This is especially problematic given documented allegations that police interfered with hospital staff, removed bodies from facilities, and prevented families from retrieving remains.
READ MORE: Tanzania Inquiry Blames Planned Attacks for Election Violence, Opposition Calls It a ‘Cover-Up’
“Investigation is a science,” the coalition stated in its analysis. “The commission failed to meet scientific standards by using potentially compromised official sources rather than conducting independent research. Using police data to investigate police conduct is methodologically unsound and undermines the reliability of findings.”
The coalition argues that the commission should have employed independent forensic analysis, conducted interviews with diverse stakeholders beyond official channels, and verified information through multiple independent sources.
Instead, the reliance on official sources creates a fundamental credibility gap that extends to the entire investigation.
The perpetrator problem
Perhaps the most significant shortcoming is the commission’s failure to identify specific individuals responsible for planning and executing the violence.
Whilst Chairman Chande described the violence as “planned, coordinated, financed, and executed by trained individuals,” the public report provides no names, identifies no chain of command, and makes no specific recommendations for prosecutions.
This represents a fundamental departure from the commission’s stated mandate to “investigate and identify the root causes of the violence” and to “investigate the main goal intended by those involved in planning and executing such acts.”
Without identifying perpetrators, the coalition argues, the commission cannot claim to have fulfilled its core responsibility.
“The commission collected sworn testimony from witnesses,” the coalition noted. “Yet it failed to use this testimony to identify those responsible. This raises serious questions about whether the full report contains information deliberately omitted from the public presentation, and whether political considerations influenced what was included.”
Foreign involvement
The commission confirmed that approximately 500 people received special training for roughly two weeks before October 29, yet provided minimal details about these camps.
The coalition criticises the lack of specificity about who conducted training, who funded it, and where exactly it occurred. Given that a training location was mentioned near a police station, the coalition questions why security forces did not detect and prevent such activity.
Similarly, whilst the commission presented evidence that participants were paid between Sh10,000 and Sh50,000, it failed to identify funding sources or objectives.
“The commission had sworn testimony about payments but did not clarify who financed the violence,” the coalition observed. “This is a critical gap that raises questions about whether the full report contains information withheld from public disclosure.”
The coalition also criticised the commission’s complete silence on widely-circulated allegations that foreign entities participated in the violence.
“The public anticipated that the commission would address claims of foreign recruitment,” the groups stated. “The commission’s failure to address this issue—whether to confirm or deny it—leaves critical national security questions unanswered.”
Death toll
The coalition questions the reliability of the reported 518 death toll, noting that evidence suggests many people were killed in residential areas and businesses rather than during protests.
The commission acknowledged that some deaths went unreported, meaning statistics are necessarily incomplete.
“The commission failed to distinguish between deaths during protests and deaths in homes and businesses,” the coalition explained. “The figure of 518 cannot be considered final or fully reliable.”
More disturbing is the commission’s acknowledgement that approximately 39 bodies were identified by families in health facilities but subsequently disappeared.
Families were unable to retrieve remains, which persist in being missing to this day. The coalition argues that the commission inadequately investigated this human rights violation.
“The commission should have identified who prevented families from retrieving bodies, under what authority bodies were withheld, and what objectives were served,” the coalition stated.
“Instead, the commission treated this as a problem to be noted rather than a violation to be investigated and prosecuted.”
Unaddressed questions
The coalition criticised the commission for failing to address the legality of a curfew order issued by the Inspector General of Police ordering residents to leave their homes—an order later used in multiple areas.
This raised serious constitutional questions about government authority to forcibly displace citizens.
“The public expected the commission to clarify the constitutional and legal basis for this order,” the coalition stated.
READ MORE: Rights Group Details Harrowing Accounts of Tanzania’s Post-Election Violence
“The commission’s silence on this critical issue leaves unresolved questions about the legality of security operations and the government’s authority during the October 2025 events,” it added.
The coalition’s most pointed criticism concerns the commission’s recommendation to establish a separate criminal investigation body rather than making specific prosecution recommendations itself.
This represents, in the coalition’s view, an abdication of responsibility and suggests political unwillingness to pursue accountability.
“If the commission had authority to investigate criminal matters—and it did—why defer this responsibility?” the coalition asked.
“The commission collected sworn testimony from witnesses,” it continued. “What was this testimony intended for if not prosecution? This approach appears designed to avoid rather than achieve accountability.”
Ignored warnings
The coalition also faulted the commission for failing to hold the government accountable for ignoring long-standing civil society recommendations about addressing the root causes of discontent.
READ MORE: Ellen Johnson Sirleaf, Sahle-Work Zewde Lead African Women Leaders into Tanzania’s Election Crisis
The commission identified five root causes—political demands for constitutional reform, economic hardship, moral decay, poor government performance, and international interference—yet these grievances have existed for years.
“Civil society has repeatedly advised the government to address these issues,” the coalition stated.
“Before the October 2025 election, we specifically recommended constitutional reforms and addressing citizen grievances. The government ignored our advice. The commission should have held the government accountable for this failure.”
Based on their analysis, the coalition issued ten specific demands. They rejected establishing a separate criminal investigation body, instead calling for an independent Truth, Accountability and National Reconciliation Commission with full public disclosure of the Justice Chande Commission’s report.
They demanded implementation of the 1992 Justice Nyalali Commission recommendations on constitutional reform and called for appropriate victim compensation exceeding the government’s proposed free medical treatment.
The coalition demanded prosecution of all those involved in killings and excessive force without bias, national reconciliation following international standards, and constitutional reform only after reconciliation is achieved.
READ MORE: Commonwealth Special Envoy Concludes Visit to Tanzania as Stakeholders Reflect on Next Steps
They called for the immediate release of all political prisoners held regarding the October 29 events, the location of over 700 missing persons, and accountability for government officials who ignored civil society recommendations.
The coalition emphasised that their analysis reflects the views of many ordinary Tanzanians expressed in communities, workplaces, and online. “We join many Tanzanians in calling for genuine accountability and justice,” the groups stated.
Their critique suggests that the political impasse surrounding October 2025 will persist despite government announcements about implementing commission recommendations.
