Dar es Salaam – The main opposition party, Chama cha Demokrasia na Maendeleo (CHADEMA), has submitted a comprehensive response to the Office of the Registrar of Political Parties, categorically rejecting all allegations and accusing the registrar of constitutional overreach and acting as a tool to suppress opposition politics.
The response, submitted on May 19, 2026, argues that the registrar is attempting to criminalise legitimate political speech and violating the separation of powers by usurping the role of the courts and public prosecutors in determining what constitutes criminal offences.
Speaking to journalists on May 20, 2026, at the High Court premises in Dar es Salaam, CHADEMA’s Deputy Secretary-General for the Mainland, Amani Golugwa, declared that the party’s response comprehensively refutes the registrar’s allegations.
“We have written to the registrar and our letter has been received,” Golugwa stated. “We have rejected and opposed all the allegations. All the things the registrar has raised are completely fabricated.”
CHADEMA’s response, which The Chanzo has seen, addresses three main allegations: statements by Deputy Chairperson John Heche regarding peaceful protests, remarks by party official Oliver Kisaka about political change, and a May 5 party statement criticising the government’s handling of the disputed October 29, 2025, elections.
Protected political speech
The party argues that all three sets of statements are protected political speech under Articles 18, 20, and 21 of the Constitution.
“The right to express political opinion, criticise the government, and express party positions on national issues, along with the right of citizens to participate in political debate, are rights directly protected by the Constitution,” CHADEMA states in its response.
Critically, CHADEMA accuses the registrar’s letter of containing a fundamental legal defect: duplicity. The party argues that the registrar simultaneously asks for explanations about alleged violations whilst threatening suspension of the party’s registration or fines.
“Your letter contains a grave defect of duplicity because it asks for two different things with different consequences,” the response states. “To demand explanations about what you call violations and then to ask us to explain why the party should not be suspended or fined is not justice and violates the principles of justice.”
On the allegations against Heche, CHADEMA argues that calling for peaceful demonstrations is not incitement and is a legitimate form of political activity protected by the Constitution. The party contends that the registrar misquoted Heche by inserting the word ‘court’ into the statement.
“Your letter does not mention anywhere that Mr Heche called on citizens to commit violence, cause destruction, or attack the court,” CHADEMA states. “It is clear that inserting the word ‘court’ into his statement is deliberately distorting what he said.”
CHADEMA emphasises that if Heche violated any law, it is the responsibility of the courts and the DPP to prosecute, not the registrar. “The courts have full authority to hear contempt of court charges under Section 114 of the Penal Code,” the response argues. “The Registrar has no legal authority to open and pursue cases about such offences.”
Regarding Kisaka’s statements about “mageuzi makubwa,” major reforms, CHADEMA argues that political change can be constitutional, democratic, and peaceful, and that the registrar’s interpretation linking the word “change” to violence violates Articles 18(1) and 29(1)-(2) and (5) of the Constitution.
Handling of elections
The most substantive portion of CHADEMA’s response concerns the May 5 party statement criticising the government’s handling of the disputed elections and calling for accountability for deaths.
“Criticising government handling of killings is protected speech,” the party states. “Calling for accountability for deaths is a constitutional duty, not incitement.”
CHADEMA notes that international bodies—including the Southern African Development Community (SADC), the African Union (AU), the European Union (EU), Human Rights Watch, and the United Nations—have also questioned the credibility of the October 29, 2025, elections.
READ MORE: Lipumba Ousted by Registrar Weeks After Speaking Out on Crackdown
“For the first time in our country’s history, our elections have been questioned by the international community,” the response notes. “Yet the party is being accused of incitement for making the same observations.”
A critical argument concerns the constitutionality of Section 19(2)(f) of the Political Parties Act. CHADEMA argues that this provision—which prohibits political parties from using “abusive, retaliatory, defamatory, or inciting language”—exceeds constitutional authority.
“Parliament violated Article 20(3) when it inserted Section 19(2)(f) in 2019,” CHADEMA argues. “This provision is unconstitutional and cannot be used to regulate political speech.”
CHADEMA emphasises that the registrar’s actions represent a fundamental threat to the multiparty system.
“The Political Parties Act cannot be used to prevent political debate, criticism of the state, or opinions about the direction of the nation,” the party argues. “To do so would transform this law into a tool for suppressing political competition rather than regulating political conduct fairly.”
READ MORE:A Tale of Two Letters: Registrar’s Divergent Responses Fuel Claims of Political Bias
The party challenges the registrar’s authority to make determinations about what constitutes criminal speech.
“It is a clear principle that the separation of powers must be respected,” CHADEMA states. “When one institution is given the task of determining criminal offences, another institution cannot take those powers and make determinations according to different standards. The courts and the DPP have the authority to determine what constitutes incitement or defamation, not the registrar.”
Not violent people
In his press conference, Golugwa emphasised that CHADEMA has the constitutional right to engage in politics and to express political opinions.
“We have the right to engage in politics in this country as a registered party,” he said. “We have freedom of expression. We are not violent people, but we cannot be weak or accept being trampled on.”
Golugwa noted that CHADEMA would continue with its planned activities, including nationwide public meetings on constitutional reform. “Times of trials like these show our strength and resilience,” he stated. “Those who persevere to the end will achieve victory.”
The exchange highlights deepening tensions between the Office of the Registrar of Political Parties and opposition groups, with critics arguing that the office has become a tool for suppressing political opposition rather than impartially regulating political conduct, charges the office denies.
However, the situation raises broader questions about the role of the registrar in Tanzania’s multiparty system and whether the office can maintain the independence and impartiality necessary for a functioning democracy.
