Dar es Salaam — The prosecution on Tuesday confronted CHADEMA vice-chairperson (Mainland) John Heche with letters inviting him and his party to present evidence to the commission led by Justice Othman Chande, challenging his earlier testimony that neither he nor any CHADEMA leader had been called to give an account of the October 29, 2025 events.
Heche examined three documents shown to him in court: a December 21, 2025 letter addressed to him; a January 2026 invitation to meet the presidential commission; and a January 2 letter addressed to CHADEMA secretary general John Mnyika.
He accepted that the letters carried his name or the party’s postal address and concerned an invitation to provide evidence, but said he did not want them made part of his evidence.
The state also played an East Africa Radio clip after the three-judge High Court rejected Lissu’s legal objection to using it to refresh the witness’s memory. In the recording, Heche accepted that the phrases “the election will not take place” and “we are determined” could be heard, although he did not remember when he made the remarks.
The exchange marked the most consequential turn in a cross-examination that had already drawn admissions from Heche that much of his evidence on alleged killings, abductions and election-related abuses was not based on events he witnessed himself. He remains under cross-examination, with the case adjourned to Wednesday, September 16, at 9 a.m.
Heche maintains party policy
Principal State Attorney Nassoro Katuga opened the day by returning to CHADEMA’s No Reforms, No Election position. Heche agreed that the party’s Central Committee had adopted a position that it would not participate in elections of the kind it considered defective until reforms were made.
READ MORE: Prosecution Tests Heche’s Evidence as CHADEMA Vice-chair Concedes Many Claims Were Second-hand
He maintained that Lissu had not used the exact phrase “mobilise rebellion” in engagements with outside stakeholders, but said the overall context of his message could have been the same even if the precise words differed.
Nassoro Katuga: “Is it your evidence that the position was not to take part in such an election until reforms were made?”
John Heche: “Correct.”
Katuga: “You told this court Lissu did not use the words ‘mobilise rebellion’ when meeting stakeholders?”
Heche: “Correct.”
Katuga: “Yet you say the words ‘we will mobilise rebellion’ and your account that he did not use those words can both be true?”
Heche: “It depends on the context. He may have used those words, or not used the exact words, but the context [was there].”
Katuga asked Heche to identify the election-law provision or systemic defect that required media outlets to provide equal coverage. Heche replied that media houses were restricted during elections and alleged that laws were not followed, but did not identify a specific provision.
READ MORE: Heche Tells Court Lissu’s Disputed April Speech Repeated CHADEMA’s Election-Reform Campaign
The prosecutor put to Heche that, despite complaining that Tanzania’s elections were not free or fair, he had accepted victory in the 2015 parliamentary election. Heche agreed that he was declared winner in an election he still described as neither free nor fair, explaining that his supporters strongly backed him and that he could not refuse to be declared elected.
Katuga: “You were declared winner in an election that was not free and fair, but you did not reject it?”
Heche: “Correct.”
Katuga: “So you entered Parliament through an election that was not free and fair?”
Heche: “Exactly.”
Court permits radio recording
Katuga told the court he wanted to show Heche a video after the witness said he could not remember whether he had told the public on East Africa Radio that the 2025 election would not happen and that CHADEMA was determined. Heche said he was not prepared to watch it, alleging that the prosecution could create false material to implicate people.
Lissu objected. He argued that the witness, not the cross-examining party, had to ask to be refreshed from a previous statement, and cited Sections 177, 163 and 63 of the Evidence Act, as well as the Lilian Fortes case.
Katuga replied that the video formed part of legitimate cross-examination under Sections 164 and 156 of the Evidence Act, and said it was being used to test the witness’s credibility.
READ MORE: Court Rejects Lissu Bid to Call President, But Summons IGP, CDF and DCI in Treason Trial
After consulting the other two judges, Justice Dunstan Ndunguru ruled that Section 177 did not require a witness himself to request a memory refresh. The court allowed the prosecution to show Heche the recording.
Justice Ndunguru: “We have considered all the submissions. Section 177 does not say that a witness must ask to be refreshed; it is proper to refresh him so that he can answer.”
After the clip was played, Heche agreed that it referred to meetings with religious leaders and other people, and accepted that it contained the phrases that the election would not occur and that the party was determined. He said he could not recall when he made the recorded remarks.
The prosecutor also asked whether the Chande address said the October 29 violence was planned and coordinated. Heche said he had heard the judge say so, although he could not remember all parts of the speech or whether it linked the violence to longstanding demands by politicians.
Letters
A central part of the day concerned Heche’s earlier evidence that he had not been invited to appear before the Chande Commission and that he did not know of any CHADEMA leader or party official who had been called.
Katuga asked the court to show the witness a letter dated December 21, 2025. Heche said it was addressed to John Wegesa Heche at CHADEMA’s P.O. Box 31191 in Dar es Salaam and signed by Honorius J. Njole. He read its subject as an invitation to submit evidence to the commission concerning the October events.
READ MORE: Lissu Calls CHADEMA Vice-chair as Defence Links ‘No Reforms’ Campaign to Election Grievances
A second letter, dated in January 2026, was addressed to Heche and called him to meet the presidential commission investigating events before and after the October 2025 General Election. A third letter, dated January 2, 2026, was addressed to Mnyika and similarly sought a meeting with the commission.
Nassoro Katuga: “How many CHADEMA Mainland vice-chairpersons are there named John Wegesa Heche?”
John Heche: “There is only one, named John Wegesa Heche.”
Heche said the documents were letters and accepted the named addressees. When Katuga asked if he wanted the correspondence included as part of his evidence, Heche said no.
The state also showed him public notices inviting members of the public to submit information about the October 29 events through WhatsApp, SMS, email and other channels. Heche accepted that he was part of the public but said he had not known of the notices.
He continued to say that CHADEMA had not been invited and that the party had not been ready to cooperate because it did not accept the commission. Pressed on whether that meant the party was willing to cooperate, Heche said he did not know.
Katuga: “Did CHADEMA give the commission cooperation?”
Heche: “How do you give a person cooperation if you have not been invited?”
Katuga: “You say you did not accept the Chande commission. Were you ready to cooperate with it?”
Heche: “I do not know.”
Arguments over ‘kukinukisha’
Katuga returned to the contested term kukinukisha, which defence witnesses have described as informal language for making something “smell” or gain attention. He asked whether burning tyres produces a smell and whether burning polling stations, fuel stations or BRT infrastructure can disrupt peace and voting.
READ MORE: CHADEMA Communications Chief Disputes Claim Lissu Published Alleged Treasonous Remarks
Heche repeatedly said he did not know, stating that he had never burnt tyres and that an item would smell only if it already had a smell.
Katuga: “Is burning a polling station and its equipment a way to stop an election?”
Heche: “It is not a way.”
Katuga: “Then how does one stop an election by meeting religious leaders?”
Heche: “Do elections happen through spirits? They are done by people, are they not?”
Heche said his understanding of uasi was opposition to oppressive systems, bad laws and wrongdoing. He maintained that the intended target of the CHADEMA campaign was the electoral commission and the broader electoral system, rather than individuals exercising their right to vote.
When Katuga asked whether the constitutional electoral commission was independent, Heche replied that it should be, but said it had been interfered with. He identified Article 74 when asked for the constitutional provision.
The prosecutor put it to him that CHADEMA, like all registered parties, had a right to participate or not participate in a general election. Heche said a party had that right, but argued that participation in an election he considered invalid would not be just.
Disputes over elements of the charge
Katuga asked Heche whether he had read the charge sheet and whether it said Lissu was charged with organising the April 3 meeting or inviting journalists. Heche initially said he had read it, but asked to see it again and ultimately said he did not know whether those particular allegations appeared in it.
READ MORE: Court Gives Lissu Treason Trial 14 More Days as Defence Calls CHADEMA Communications Chief
He nevertheless repeated his evidence that the party secretariat arranged the meeting and invited media outlets. He also said he could not know whether Lissu wanted the April speech to reach the public, but agreed that the secretariat could not compel the party chairman to speak to journalists.
The prosecutor asked who chaired the meeting, whether minutes were kept, and whether Lissu was its main speaker. Heche said the meeting had no chair, that not every CHADEMA meeting had minutes, that he spoke for about half an hour and that Lissu was the principal speaker.
Heche accepted that Lissu made several words and statements mentioned by Katuga, including that the party would stop and disrupt the election, that it would make it “smell very badly,” that judges were CCM members, that courts were inaccessible, and that police took bags containing fake ballots into polling stations.
He said Lissu gave reasons and evidence for the statement about judges, including a reference to former chief justice Augustino Ramadhani, and maintained that the disputed phrases occurred within a speech lasting more than three hours.
Katuga: “Did you hear the chairman say, ‘We will stop the election’?”
Heche: “Yes.”
Katuga: “Did you hear him say, ‘We will disrupt this election’?”
Heche: “I heard [him].”
Katuga: “Did you hear him say, ‘We will make it smell very badly’?”
Heche: “He said that, along with many other things — not only what you selected to open this case.”
When asked whether Lissu gave methods for stopping, disrupting or mobilising rebellion, Heche said he did not tell the meeting any such methods. He maintained that the alleged rebellion concerned the electoral commission and the system.
Upcoming witnesses
The cross-examination included renewed questions about Heche’s own arrest in October 2025 and the state’s allegation that detained people implicated CHADEMA leaders in planning the October 29 unrest. Heche said he had been in police custody from October 22 and could not have taken part in events on October 29.
Katuga asked why Heche had refused to make a statement when police questioned him. Heche said he had exercised his right to remain silent.
The prosecution ended its questions without releasing the witness. Lissu began re-examination and sought to clarify aspects of Heche’s answers about candidate disqualification, the treatment of his 2015 election victory, Lissu’s medical treatment after the 2017 shooting, and party financial management.
Heche said the party secretary general, not the vice-chairperson, was the accounting officer responsible for CHADEMA contributions. He denied knowing two people, Salman and Nilesh, who were associated in cross-examination with deposits of Sh10 million and Sh20 million into his account.
He also described the video previously put to him by the prosecution as possibly manufactured through artificial intelligence.
Lissu told the judges Heche was his final civilian witness and asked that the three state security witnesses previously summoned — IGP Camillius Wambura, CDF John Mkunda and DCI Kingai — be brought to court on Wednesday so he could consult them over the remaining defence evidence.
Justice Ndunguru adjourned the case to Wednesday at 9 a.m., with Heche still under oath and his re-examination not complete.
