Dar es Salaam – A three-judge High Court panel has temporarily stopped disciplinary proceedings that could remove Tanganyika Law Society President Boniface Mwabukusi from practice, while it considers his constitutional challenge to the National Advocates Committee and parts of the law governing it.
The October 7 order in Constitutional Case No. 000025918 of 2026 stays the committee’s proceedings pending the appearance of Advocate Chacha Mwita Nashon, who lodged the professional-misconduct complaint. The court set October 16 at 11:00am for further orders.
The order turns a complaint about remarks concerning Tundu Lissu’s then-pending treason case into a wider legal test of two related issues: what advocates may say in public about a live case, and whether the statutory process for disciplining them meets constitutional standards.
“Pending the appearance of the 3rd Respondent in this Petition, a conservatory order is hereby granted staying the proceedings before the National Advocates Committee,” the panel of Justices A. R. Mruma, Suleiman Hassan and Irene Musokwa said in their order.
The immediate dispute
Mwabukusi’s lawyers, Mpale Mpoki and Jebra Kambole, told the court that they had attempted to serve Nashon at a physical office, by email and through WhatsApp, but had not secured his appearance.
They asked for substituted service, meaning court-approved notice through an alternative method, and for the disciplinary case to be paused in the meantime.
READ MORE: Firebrand Lawyer Mwabukusi Reinstated in TLS’ Presidential Race After Court Ruled in His Favour
State Attorney Erigh Rumisha did not oppose the request for substituted service but resisted an interim stay before Nashon could be heard. “We have no objection to the prayer for substituted service,” he said, adding that Nashon, as the complainant before the committee, should have the opportunity guaranteed by the Constitution to be heard.
The court authorised service through notices in Mwananchi and Daily News newspaper within seven days. It nonetheless issued the temporary stay, which does not decide whether Mwabukusi committed misconduct or whether the disciplinary system is constitutional.
Complaint against Mwabukusi
Nashon’s May 28 application, filed as Application No. 04 of 2026, asks the National Advocates Committee to find Mwabukusi guilty of gross professional misconduct, remove his name from the Roll of Advocates and award costs.
The complaint concerns statements made at the Tanganyika Law Society’s annual general meeting in Arusha and at a May 11 press conference about Lissu’s treason case. It cites Regulation 137 of the Advocates (Professional Conduct and Etiquette) Regulations, 2018, which says: “An advocate shall not comment on a specific case that is pending before the court in a manner that prejudges the outcome of such case.”
In the application, Nashon attributes to Mwabukusi the statement that Lissu was “not a traitor” and should be released, and another assertion that the prosecution had no genuine intention to proceed with the case.
The application argues that the remarks prejudged an active case and could undermine public confidence in the judiciary; those are the applicant’s allegations, which the committee has not determined.
The rule does not prohibit every explanation of a case to journalists. Its wording makes the critical question whether a public statement on a particular pending case prejudges its outcome, a distinction already at issue in the separate contempt prosecution of Advocate Peter Madeleka, who has denied wrongdoing.
A case awaiting judgment
Lissu’s trial remained unresolved when Mwabukusi spoke in April and May. The High Court had not then heard the evidence, and the treason case has since moved through the defence and final-submission stages.
On September 28, Lissu completed his defence by telling the judges, “If you find there is treason, do not hesitate to convict and punish me appropriately. If you find there is no treason, do not hesitate to acquit me.” Two days later, the prosecution asked the court to convict him, and the panel fixed November 6 for judgment.
That later procedural history does not resolve the complaint, which will be assessed against what was said and the case’s status at the time.
It does, however, explain why Rule 137’s line between commentary and prejudgment is central: the outcome was then, and remains, for the judges rather than the parties or their advocates.
Unconstitutional?
Mwabukusi’s amended constitutional petition, which The Chanzo has seen, challenges sections 5, 9, 18, 19, 20 and 38 of the Advocates Act. It asks the High Court to declare that the provisions and the committee’s decision to summon him violate constitutional guarantees of equality, a fair hearing, freedom of expression and related rights.
READ MORE: Madeleka Contempt Case Tests Thin Line Between Press Briefings and Judicial Interference
The petition says the TLS annual meeting directed its Governing Council to hold a press conference within 48 hours to communicate the Society’s position on Lissu’s treason proceedings and related matters.
It says Mwabukusi’s May 11 briefing, attended by Governing Council members, implemented that resolution rather than advancing a personal position.
The resolution instructed the Council to consider the “status, conduct, and implications” of Lissu’s proceedings, including the need for an expeditious conclusion and his health. It also directed TLS to consider joining a constitutional petition over prison restrictions on lawyers’ access to Lissu.
Mwabukusi argues that, by treating those statements as an individual disciplinary matter, the respondents have interfered with both his own expression and the institutional role of the Law Society.
The petition also challenges the committee’s structure, saying the statutory roles assigned to the Attorney General and other executive legal officers do not adequately protect the independence of private advocates; these are claims before the court, not findings.
How it works
The National Advocates Committee is a statutory body, not a TLS organ. Under the Advocates Act, it consists of a High Court judge nominated by the Chief Justice, the Attorney General, Deputy Attorney General or Director of Public Prosecutions, and a practising advocate nominated by the TLS Council.
Under the same Act, two members form a quorum, one of whom must be the Attorney General, Deputy Attorney General or DPP. The Attorney General fixes the times and places of meetings, may convene a meeting to inquire into alleged misconduct, and may require the complainant to support allegations with an affidavit.
The committee may require an advocate to answer an allegation or show cause why their name should not be removed from the Roll. Before determining a complaint, the Act requires notice and an opportunity to be heard; if misconduct is established, the available sanctions are removal, suspension or an admonition, with a right of appeal to the High Court.
Those provisions explain the practical stakes of the constitutional petition. They also sit alongside the Tanganyika Law Society Act, which gives TLS a dual role: upholding professional standards while assisting government, Parliament and courts on the administration and practice of law, representing advocates and helping the public on legal matters.
The UN Basic Principles on the Role of Lawyers similarly recognise lawyers’ right to take part in public discussion about law, justice and human rights, but require them to observe law and professional ethics.
They say disciplinary complaints should be handled fairly by an impartial professional committee, independent statutory authority or court, with independent judicial review.
The High Court has not ruled on the constitutionality of the challenged provisions or on the merits of Nashon’s complaint. Its October 7 order preserves the status quo until Nashon is served and the parties return on October 16.
Solidarity
On October 11, the East Africa Law Society, the International Bar Association’s Human Rights Institute, Lawyers for Lawyers, the Pan African Lawyers Union and the Southern African Development Community Lawyers Association issued a joint solidarity statement.
READ MORE: Tanzanian Police Surround Lawyers’ Association Headquarters to Quash Planned Protest
It called permanent removal from the Roll for communicating a bar-association position “exceptionally severe,” welcomed the High Court’s stay and urged that no irreversible sanction be imposed while the constitutional case is unresolved. The statement places the case within a longer public dispute over lawyers’ independence.
In February 2024, TLS members cited detentions, intimidation and disciplinary sanctions as examples of what they described as growing interference with private advocates’ work; then Attorney General Eliezer Feleshi said no lawyer had been denied the right to practise and that measures targeted professional misconduct.
The concern resurfaced in September 2025, when police surrounded TLS headquarters on the day of a planned demonstration after the reported assault of Advocate Deogratius Mahinyila at the High Court.
Police said they were acting to prevent a breach of the peace, while TLS said it was seeking a safe environment for lawyers to perform their duties.
