Dar es Salaam – A candidate seeking a parliamentary seat in Tanzania reported spending an average of Sh170.7 million, or about US$64,595, across the political cycle in a new study that identifies money, informal inducements and costly party primaries as “major barriers” to inclusive representation in the East African nation.
The Westminster Foundation for Democracy report, written by University of Dar es Salaam political scientist Consolata Raphael Sulley, was made public on July 31, 2026. It examined what individual aspirants and candidates said they spent from the decision to seek office through an elected term, rather than political parties’ overall expenditure.
The study, conducted between January and April 2026 after the October 2025 general election, combined a document review with interviews involving party officials, aspirants, candidates, members of parliament, civil-society representatives, academics and the Office of the Registrar of Political Parties.
It cautions that the small, purposive qualitative sample means the reported average is an indicator of interviewees’ experience, not a nationally generalisable measure of every candidate’s spending.
Even with that qualification, the range was substantial: participants reported spending from Sh3 million to Sh500 million, and interviewees said they had heard of even higher sums. The report compares its average with 23 years of the average formal-sector employee’s cash earnings and almost 49 years of GDP-per-capita income.
The costs identified extend beyond nomination forms and the official Sh50,000 parliamentary deposit. They include party nomination fees, transport, fuel, campaign teams, posters and media, polling agents, community contributions, and ongoing requests for assistance after an election, along with what respondents described as cash, gifts, food, transport, and other “facilitation” for delegates, party actors, and voters.
READ MORE: BoT, Government Refute Money-Printing Allegations to Finance Election Campaigns
One incumbent CCM candidate told researchers that running six vehicles for 60 campaign days had cost Sh600,000 a day in fuel, or Sh216 million in all. The study also records MPs’ accounts of meeting requests for school fees, medical bills, funeral contributions and other support after they take office, extending the financial demands beyond election day.
Primaries at the centre
The report locates much of the pressure inside party nominations, particularly in the ruling CCM. It says an average of 15 aspirants competed for the ruling party’s symbol for each parliamentary seat in 2025, while some party officials said delegate numbers in constituencies had risen from about 1,200 to more than 10,000.
A CCM candidate described internal nominations as a “do or die game,” while another MP said they spent about Sh100 million in the party selection process and a further Sh80 million in the general election.
The report says opposition candidates it interviewed generally faced lower primary-stage costs, reflecting fewer aspirants in some contests and, in one cited CHAUMMA case, no primary election because there were no rival nominees.
The study attributes the escalation to what it calls the “commercialisation of politics,” intense intra-party competition, enlarged selectorates, voter expectations of immediate material benefit and weak enforcement of finance rules.
A CCM official told the researchers that leadership positions were seen as “business,” and that candidates were expected to offer payoffs in return for votes.
READ MORE: Tanzania Inquiry Blames Planned Attacks for Election Violence, Opposition Calls It a ‘Cover-Up’
An ACT Wazalendo candidate was quoted alleging that a competitor distributed money to delegates in broad daylight on the morning of voting. The report presents that as interview testimony, not a judicial finding, but says such accounts across parties point to the “normalisation of informal spending.”
This sits alongside a legal framework designed to regulate political finance. The Election Expenses Act defines election expenses to include the nomination process, campaigns and elections, gives the Registrar supervisory and information-gathering powers, and requires disclosure of funds.
Before the 2025 polls, the Registrar’s Office said it could investigate breaches and object to candidates who violated expense rules, while urging parties to file their declarations.
However, the study argues that the 2025 ceiling order covered political parties’ nomination expenditure but left no individual limit for aspirants in primaries, which it describes as the most expensive stage for many contenders.
It also notes that the order set official campaign ceilings of Sh49.5 million to Sh132 million for open parliamentary seats and Sh22 million for women’s special seats. Those limits sit below the study’s reported average, a gap the author says raises “questions about their realism and enforcement.”
Who is priced out
The report finds that high costs weigh most heavily on women, young people and persons with disabilities, who may have less access to personal wealth, loans, elite networks and party backing.
Women respondents also described security and care responsibilities, as well as gendered scrutiny and reputational risk, as additional burdens of pursuing office.
It records that women held 38 of the 272 directly elected parliamentary seats after the 2025 elections, while representation of persons with disabilities in the legislature was through special-reserve seats.
A CCM official told the study that patriarchy and discrimination mean women, young people and persons with disabilities “have to give and do extra to be accepted.”
The report says some CCM first-time candidates received post-nomination campaign support, including cash and materials, but that this does not address the earlier hurdle of funding outreach, travel and networking to win a party endorsement.
It says targeted financial support for comparable groups was less commonly reported by opposition respondents, whose parties cited constrained resources.
The wider implication, according to the study, is not simply that elections become expensive. It argues that high and poorly regulated costs can privilege wealthy or connected candidates, encourage patronage and clientelism, and make elected leaders more attentive to financiers, delegates or the recovery of campaign spending than to representation and public service.
“For most voters, election campaigns are seen as ‘a time to eat,’ where immediate benefits can outweigh later demands for service delivery,” an ACT Wazalendo youth leader told the study.
The study concludes that political competition necessarily requires resources, but that the present structure has moved beyond legitimate financing into a high-stakes system shaped by informal payments, inducements, costly nominations and limited accountability.
The report warns that, unless addressed, this pattern could reproduce elite dominance and further weaken confidence in representative politics.
A proposed reform agenda
The study recommends starting with public dissemination and structured dialogue involving parties, the Independent National Electoral Commission, the Registrar, Parliament, civil society, media, academics, women, youth and disability-rights representatives.
It proposes using those discussions to agree on legal, party and civic reforms ahead of future elections.
Its legal proposals include evidence-based spending caps for individual aspirants during party primaries, quicker investigations and proportionate sanctions for bribery and excessive expenditure, stronger enforcement independence and wider public access to expense information.
READ MORE: Tanzania to Fully Fund 2025 General Election Without Donor Support
It also calls for regulators to publish action taken against offenders, rather than only collect declarations.
For parties, the report proposes enforceable bans on cash payments, gifts and delegate facilitation, clearer budget declarations, sanctions for vote buying, smaller nominating bodies or merit-based shortlists, and dedicated funds for women, youth and persons with disabilities.
It also calls for continuous civic education to discourage inducements, training in lower-cost ethical campaigning, financial literacy and fundraising support for first-time candidates, and mentorship networks that offer alternatives to patronage.
