Dar es Salaam – The Court of Appeal of Tanzania has dismissed an application for revision filed by the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) in the ongoing treason trial of opposition leader Tundu Lissu, marking a significant legal victory for the defence.
The ruling, delivered virtually on July 30, 2026, by a panel of three justices—Augustine Mwarija, Zainabu Goronya Muruke, and Amour Said Khami—found the prosecution’s application to be “devoid of merit.”
The decision upholds a February 24 High Court ruling that struck down the prosecution’s attempt to introduce additional evidence from a witness who had already testified.
The legal dispute centred on the prosecution’s notice of intention to allow ACP Amini Mahamba to adduce additional evidence. The High Court had previously rejected this notice as incompetent, prompting the DPP to seek a revision at the Court of Appeal.
In their judgment, the justices agreed with the High Court’s interpretation of Section 308 of the Criminal Procedure Act (CPA). The Court clarified that this section provides an exception for calling a witness whose evidence was not read at the committal proceedings, provided reasonable notice is given.
READ MORE: Lissu Treason Trial Halted as Prosecution Flees to Appeals Court After Defeat
However, the Court of Appeal ruled that this provision does not apply to the prosecution’s situation. “It does not set out the conditions for granting leave to a witness whose evidence was read, to be recalled to adduce additional evidence as intended in the notice issued by the prosecution,” the justices stated in their ruling.
The Court concluded that the prosecution’s notice was “misconceived” and that the trial court was “justified to strike it out.”
Before reaching the substantive merits, the Court had to navigate a complex procedural dispute. Mr Lissu had filed a preliminary objection arguing that the law prohibits appeals or revisions against interlocutory (temporary or preliminary) decisions.
The Court of Appeal dismissed this objection, clarifying a critical distinction in Tanzanian law. The justices noted that following a 2016 amendment, the prohibition against challenging interlocutory decisions applies exclusively to civil cases. The phrase “criminal charge” was deliberately deleted from the relevant provision.
“The parties to a criminal case are not barred from invoking the Court’s revisional powers,” the ruling stated, maintaining the constitutional principle of equality of arms between the prosecution and the defence.
READ MORE: Tundu Lissu Warns of ‘Pandora’s Box’ in Fiery Clash Over New Evidence
Despite overruling Mr Lissu’s preliminary objection, the Court ultimately ruled in his favour on the substantive merits of the application.
During the proceedings, Mr Lissu had also prayed for compensation, arguing that the application was frivolously instituted to delay the criminal case. He noted that the proceedings had been stayed for 139 days as a result of the application, causing him agony while in custody.
The Court declined to entertain this prayer, citing a lack of jurisdiction. The justices explained that compensation under Section 367 of the CPA can only be ordered by a court of first instance upon the acquittal of an accused person, if it is established that the charge was frivolous or vexatious.
The dismissal of the DPP’s revision application means the treason trial will resume at the High Court without the additional evidence the prosecution sought to introduce through ACP Mahamba.
For Mr Lissu, who has been detained since April 9, 2025, the ruling removes a major procedural hurdle that had suspended his trial since February.
READ MORE: Judges Reject Prosecution Bid to Silence Court Reporting; Lissu Pushes to Discredit More Witnesses
The opposition leader, who survived a 2017 assassination attempt, continues to face these charges amid growing international scrutiny over his prolonged incarceration and the broader implications for civic space in the country.
