win-one
JF-Expert Member
- May 28, 2024
- 11,056
- 37,608
mfano akinyongwa utapata faida gani?
Kesi ya Uhaini: Tundu Lissu kuhitimisha ushahidi Mkuu leo, Agosti 26, 2026 Mahakamani
Kesi ya Uhaini: Tundu Lissu kuhitimisha ushahidi Mkuu leo, Agosti 26, 2026 Mahakamani
- Thread starter Waufukweni
- Start date
- Featured
Tlaatlaah
JF-Expert Member
- May 18, 2023
- 51,453
- 41,274
ni sheria inatekelezwa gentleman na si vinginevyo š
kaisar19
JF-Expert Member
- May 24, 2021
- 274
- 488
TLS Ana akili sana uyu babu
26 August 2026
High Court of Tanzania
Kivukoni Front
Dar es Salaam, Tanzania
Treason Case - PART 277
Treason case No. 19605 / 2025 Republic versus Tundu Lissu.
The Chairman of CHADEMA the Party for Democracy and Development , Tundu Antipas Lissu, who is facing a treason case, is expected to conclude the first part of his defense evidence, namely the evidence in chief , on the third day of his defense.
N.B
Evidence in chief is the primary testimony given by a witness in court to support the party who called them
Today, Wednesday, August 26, 2026, Tundu Lissu is expected to conclude by highlighting the prosecution's evidence, by analyzing what he calls his weaknesses in convincing the court that it was unable to prove the charges against him to the legally required standard, i.e that is, beyond any doubt.
This stage will conclude the first part of his evidence, namely the main evidence, and enter the second part of his evidence, namely the additional evidence (cross examination).
At this stage, he will be questioned by the prosecutors with various questionnaire questions related to his primary evidence.
Tundu Lissu is facing the case at the High Court, Kivukoni Front Dar es Salaam, which is being heard by a panel of three judges, justice Dunstan Ndunguru with bench having also judges James Karayemaha and Ferdinand Kiwonde.
Court Updates
In the court Tundu Lissu's sister leading the prayers in court before the trial begins.
Tundu Lissu has entered the courtroom and as usual, people are chanting Lissu is not 'Muhaini' meaning he is not a traitor. After a short while, he speaks to John Heche the vice chairperson of CHADEMA party, ordering him to continue working hard for the party and country. I (Tundu Lissu) heard that there is a discontent among higher ranking CCM party leaders, and one bigwig has already tendered a resignation letter
UPDATES FROM COURT, Treason Case - PART 277
The. court clerk stands and mention the Criminal session No. 19605 / 2025 Republic against Tundu Lissu.
Attorney Ajuyaye Zengeli, the government state attorney, stands up introducing fellow attorneys who are Nassoro Katuga, Job Mrema, Ignas Mwinuka, Thawabu Issa, Cathbert Mbiringe and Winiwa Kasawa, the entire group represents the Republic while Tundu Antipas Lissu is present, representing himself.
Honorable judges and I am ready for the case says Tundu Antipas Lissu. And my witnesses are here, I ask them to leave but not to stay far away.
The judges are conserving and laughing a little. Vice-Chairperson John Heche, secretary general John Mnyika, Amani Golugwa and Brenda Rupia excuse themselves and leave the court room
The judges then they say let's continue with today's business.
Hon. Tundu Lissu says it wouldn't be amiss if you remind me where I left off.
Judge Dunstan Ndunguru reminds Tundu Lissu, last time you ended the day when you mentioned Bishop Pissa.
Hon. Tundu Lissu now today I want to focus on the case as presented to you by the Prosecutor. First, Your Honors, I would like to make the following introduction:
1. What kind of witnesses were brought before you my lords and what kind of weight should their evidence be given?
2. Secondly, I will discuss the evidence itself. The evidence given by these witnesses. And I will show that there is no crime of Treason and no criminal offense, so those are the two introductions.
Now, let me start with the first one about those witnesses brought by prosecutor (Republic).
During the Preliminary hearing, the prosecution brought a list of 30 witnesses. Who they said would be the ones to bring evidence to prove the charges of treason against me.
The prosecution did not bring all 30 witnesses, instead they brought only 17 witnesses.
The 13 who were not brought, were not brought for some important reason and I will mention them.
That omission of those 13 witnesses is neither insignificant nor without importance.
It is not because they are meaningless and it is not because they are unimportant.
Let me start with those who were brought before your, my Lords (judges).
Of the 17 witnesses who were brought. 8 witnesses are police officers.
The remaining 9 witnesses are protected ( anonymous / secret) witnesses.
The Court does not know their names. It does not know them at all, it does not know where they live? It does not know what they do and it does not know anything other than the anonymous names P, P1, P2 P ...
We may have had them (anonymous witnesses) throughout this case if it is ongoing because the Court does not know them and the defense does not know them at all.
Therefore, the evidence of those 9 anonymous witnesses is the evidence of people unknown to the Court or the defense, the only people who know them are the prosecutors who brought them.
SECTION 278
It is possible that those secret witnesses are police officers or anyone, they are the witnesses in the Treason case.
The 8 witnesses who are Police officers are witnesses of the Police Force led by IGP Camilius Wambura and Director of Criminal Investigations (DCI) Ramadhani Kingai with whom I have shown that I have a feud with them for more than two decades.
IGP and DCI have Personal vendetta against me, This vendetta is an Italian word meaning Hatred.
These people have had a grudge against me that is why they have brought these witnesses to give evidence of treason against me.
My lords Judges, the evidence of Witness No. 1 and No. 16 PW1 and PW 16, is very important evidence.
Not that it is weighty but it is important it shows the type of evidence that was presented.
PW 1 assistant Commissioner of Police -ACP George Bagyemu (if you hear PW you know it is Prosecution Witness) said in his evidence that, He is the one who led the investigation team of this case between April 04 and April 08, 2025.
PW1 in other words was leading the investigation the day before I was arrested. PW1 said in his evidence in chief and in cross examination that when he was leading the investigation team from that date and 04 he was in direct contact with DCI Ramadhani Kingai that is to be specific through Ramadhani Ng'azi Deputy Commissioner of Police -DCP.
In Cross Examination I asked him if he had ever contacted the Zonal Crime Officer - ZCO who is his Boss and he said no. He also said he had never contacted the Director of Public Prosecution-DPP's office because he is the one who coordinates the criminal investigation and he said caterogatilly NO
I asked him if he had contacted the Regional Security Officer-RSO who is under Tanzania Intelligence Security Sevrice-TISS, had he ever contacted him? He said No. That the Regional Security Officer said he had not done so.
The person who admitted to contacting him was DCI Ramadhani Kingai and so through DCP Ramadhani Ng'anzi,
PW1 said he formed three Investigation teams. Which are 1. Operations, 2. Intelligence and 3. Advisory.
Out of those 3 teams, the team I want to give evidence for is the Operations team which he said was involved in the arrest. I asked him if you were the one who ordered my arrest and he said no, the Chief of Investigation does not know who ordered my arrest.
How did I get arrested? He replied that he was called by DCP Ng'anzi that the suspect had been arrested in Mbinga and was being brought to Dar es Salaam.
Remember, he says he was the chief investigator at the time, now the Honorable Judges who reported that I was arrested was the one who was the liaison between him and DCI Kingai and presumably IGP Wambura.
Now it is my evidence that I was arrested on the orders of KINGAI DCI and Presumably IGP Wambura were the ones who ordered my arrest and they were the ones who fabricated the case, not these people here, he shows Katuga.
And these DCI Kingai people have been on a strategy to imprison me for the past 24 years. They have always failed. Honorable Judges, what PW 1 said was substantially proven 16 times, ACP Amin Mahamba confirmed it.
The other witnesses are PW2, PW 3, PW 6, PW 9, PW 12 and PW 15. Their evidence is generally the evidence of the people of DCI Ramadhani Kingai and IGP Camilius Wambura.
Police officers whose superiors have had a strategy to imprison me for 24 years. When you summarize this and similar evidence, it has no value.
It is the evidence of interested witnesses that needs to be corroborated by independent evidence. I want to say that this is the evidence we have and I will present it later.
Now let me talk about the evidence of witnesses who are not Police. PW4, PW 5, PW7, PW 8, PW 10, PW 11, PW13 and PW 14. These are the witnesses that no one knows except the prosecutor.
All these witnesses we have their written statements and their oral statements while they are here in Court. Except for PW 1 we do not have his written evidence but all the others we have.
Now let me go back to the secret witnesses if you leave out PW 4, all the other 7 said this in writing and while they were in court here.
PART 279
Hon. Tundu Lissu continues to give his defense.L:
1. They plotted to commit crimes during the general elections last year. All of them said so in writing, these secret witnesses and the statements were written by the Police. (Beating people, burning things) they said that. And the evidence is there with you.
2. All of them except PW4 were arrested by the Police for plotting to commit violence and they were all arrested on those four days, namely on April 4 and April 8. The Police knew about it and arrested them all within four days.
3. All of these witnesses after being arrested by the Police confessed. They confessed that they were planning to commit violence during the elections, while in court they said that they planned to commit crimes again they confessed that in writing
4. Funny enough The witnesses who were arrested as suspects, were all released so that they could continue plotting, that is, you arrest someone for a crime and you release them.
5. All of them were called by the Police PW 16 ACP Amin Mahamba and told them to agree to be witnesses against Tundu Lissu and if they agree, we will drop the charges against them.
The criminals have confessed before the Police, They were released and became witnesses against Tundu Lissu.
6. The criminals who self confessed came from Dar es Salaam, and in Dar es Salaam October (2025) 182 people were killed according to Judge Chande.
PW 10 and PW 11 came from Arusha, and in Arusha 53 people were killed according to report of Judge Mohamed Chande. PW13 and PW 14 came from Mbeya and there 80 people were killed according to Judge MOHAMED CHANDE. (The police arrested people who said they had planned to commit a crime in October 2025 and released them and that October the same crime occurred while these people were citizens.)!
Pw 5 and Pw 7 came from Songea and Judge Chande says that people also died there but he did not mention the number of those who died in Songea.
PW 16 ACP Amin Mahamba said he was on the team of investigators who investigated the October 29 2025 killings and I asked those who said they planned to commit atrocities, did you take any action against them because the riots occurred? He replied that NO, no action was taken.
My Lords, what is the LEGAL weight of the evidence of these types of criminals? This is the Government's evidence against me.
The evidence of criminals who confessed that they would commit a crime and came to Court and confessed. Then returned to where they were planning and later many people were killed on the streets. What is the weight of this type of evidence in a treason case?
These types of witnesses are totally unreliable. I will present those legal arguments in writing.
My Lords, the indictment states that I created an intention to threaten the Government of the United Republic of Tanzania and I confirmed that intention by uttering those famous words.
Now, Your Honors, in relation to this indictment and according to the legal decisions we have discussed a lot, the important thing is the presence of an intention to commit the crime of treason.
What does the evidence of the Republic say about the intention to commit the crime of treason? The witnesses who gave evidence to prove this argument are the following.
PW1, PW2, PW16 and PW17 who is P the writer with your consent I request to be given exhibits D1, D15 and D16.
A short silence passes.
The judges are writing and the exhibits are being sought.
The evidence of PW 1 ACP George Bagyemu Assistant to SACP Mafwele regarding the intention to commit the crime of treason alleged in the indictment in his evidence said that I created the intention to threaten the government.
He saw the intention to commit the crime of treason in the statement I made. He saw the intention in the words.
My Lord Judges another witness who saw that intention is PW 16 ACP Amin Mahamba. Honorable Judges Exhibit D15 his explanation The police said this ACP Mahamba said this "I together with the entire investigation team watched and listened to the video and found that there was an offence of treason and publishing false information."
SECTION 280
The State Attorney Nasoro Katuga stands up and says this is a defense and the example was thus received as Exhibit D.
It is received to show contradiction and start referring to it as a regular example. It will have a contradiction to section 163, it is for a specific purpose and if you allow it, we will use it against him. It will be harmful to both parties, we ask the Court to return to the purpose of receiving the example.
Tundu Lissu says now I should say that if it is for their pleasure, I want it to be for pleasure.
I have no problem with them just using it, the Example is related to this case and the Court must read it and look at it.
No example is taken just for the sake of cross examination, Your Honors, I am using it because it is related to the case.
Now that they have said it is their pleasure, I wonder now why they are complaining. I intentionally included it so that they can use it, I again wonder that they do not want it.
Judge Ndunguru says since the example has been included we cannot say we are preventing the use of that example. So you just go ahead, the example is already in the Court, let's use it.
Tundu Lissu says okay I will continue.
ACP Amin Mahamba has said that himself and the team watched the video and saw the offenses of treason and spreading false information.
So PW 16 saw the intention to commit the offense with PW 1, they saw the intention.
PW2 and PW 17 did they see the intention?
Honorable Judges according to Exhibit D1 John Kaaya says in the moving picture (video) I saw Tundu Lissu uttering statements with criminal indicators.
Nowhere did he talk about treason, the offense of treason and the intention of treason.
He saw the indicators of crime.
PW 17 says in his statement he says this. In that meeting, the issues being discussed were issues regarding the 2025 General Election and their agenda of No Reforms, No election and the problems they are facing in the Election. On This one he did not see any treason.
He says he saw us talking about No Reforms No Election and the problems we are facing, he did not say anything about treason at all.
PW 17 is the only witness who was present at the meeting and he did not see any wrongdoing or treason.
The second argument being argued in this case is the manifestation of that intention. The words are these, they say the same thing here, this position indicates rebellion ........ he reads aloud all of them .What is alleged to have been said are those words.
Now what does the evidence say about these words?
Regarding those words, the evidence of PW1, PW2 and PW 16 is similar to all those other witnesses saying that they saw the video with those words.
And their evidence has said that I was the one who published and sent them to Jambo TV an online Youtube TV. What does the evidence of PW 17 the eye witness say?
Witness No. 17 of the prosecution in his statement D16 says that in the meeting the issues that were discussed were about the general election and the No Reforms No Election issues.
There is no mention of it in D15, he did not see those words, he did not hear them, he did not write them down or say them here. The one who was there did not see them, he did not hear them because he did not write them down and did not say them.
If he had heard them, he would have said them, if he had seen them, he would have written them down. PW17 said here in Court and in exhibit D16 that he was the one who took the pictures and broadcasted them with four of his colleagues using SONY cameras. They are all employees of JAMBO TV. They broadcasted the meeting Live.
PW17 also said in writing and here in Court that he was the one who saved those videos on the Jambo network on Youtube, X and Instagram. He said is not me (Tundu Lissu).
Section 281
Tundu Lissu continues to give his defense.
So with the element of publication, the evidence presented by the prosecution is the same.
The witnesses who were not present said the words were spoken and the one who was present did not say the words were spoken.
The one who was present admits that the publication was made by him. The distribution is his and not someone else.
PW 17 was asked did you hear any criminal statement? He said NO.
I asked him did you hear any treasonous statement? His answer is NO.
My evidence on that publication and intention is my evidence, the witnesses who came and said I committed a crime are confusing themselves, they are saying different things themselves.
Now, Honorable Judges, this is the confusion between the words spoken or not. Was there an intention or not? What was said or not said, if there was a video itself, we could have resolved that dispute.
The onus of bringing the video was on the prosecution side (Republic), they did not bring the video.
The court will not sit and know whether everything said in the video is true or just a lie.
Proof is video, not words and that video does not exist. They have taken out two or three words, they want to say it is treason and then they have left out all the words.
They said they will bring 11 examples, they said they will bring 9 others and they will bring two that are not written. They have not brought even one. Those that are not written, physical, are empty words, and empty words do not break a bone.
And in treason case, mere words do not constitute an overt act. Words and words do not constitute treason. Khatibu Gandi alias McGhee, qoute the case. What are you doing in government offices and then you call yourself lawyers?
Honorable Judges, there are acts of procedural violations when they arrest me and the investigation of this case:
1. It is a law that the National Prosecution Act states that their Director of Public Prosecutions is the one who coordinates the criminal investigation.
Katuga says at this stage he should not go into the law there.
Lissu says I was just doing the foundation of my evidence that I want to give
Judge Ndunguru says, continue now,
we have understood each other, go directly now.
Hon. Lissu Evidence No. 1 and 16 I asked them this, the DPP coordinated this investigation, the answer is no.
They were asked again whether the DPP representative was present in the investigation team and they said no but PW 16 said there was someone with a Bantu name.
Therefore, the investigation did not involve the DPP.
Honorable Judges Witness No. 01, 02 and 16, namely George, Kaaya and ACP Mahamba, were asked that you recognize that in the PGO you have decided to respect the constitutional right to express opinions and hold assemblies and were asked to show whether they considered the rights of the accused?
I was told to show my rights in their statements and their evidence did not have anything to say about how they protected my rights.
Section 282
He says that I showed these PW1, 2 and 16 the articles of the penal code and the media law regarding it being neither incitement nor an offence to show the shortcomings of the government and oppose the government and they admitted and said yes it was not an offence. I did the work and they admitted that it was not an offence.
When I told them where they considered those articles during their investigation, they said they did not and had nothing to say about those matters.
PGO 1 (24) the main pillar is the presumption of innocence I asked them where they treated me as innocent the whole time they were with me? No one considered that at all. They were just going their own way. They thought I was already suspected and a traitor.
ON 04/04/ 2025 they saw the video namely PW1 and PW 2 namely PW 1 sent it to PW 2 and showed it to him in pieces (bits of clips). And on the same day he ordered the file to be opened. He ordered the file to be opened.
Therefore there was no presumption of innocence that Lissu had committed treason on the same day they decided that.
PW 16 ACP Amin Mahamba says that when he looked and saw treason, there was no presumption of innocence, that's why they didn't want to get advice from the DPP or the government's legal advisors.
And since they already had the answers, that's why they were asked, did you look for CHADEMA leaders and ask them? They answered NO.
Did you look for Tundu Lissu himself and ask me what I meant? They said NO.
So I say that they didn't look for me because they already saw that they had a culprit.
That's why even when they were presented with the evidence of PW 17, the one from JAMBO. He says, was the one who published and distributed it and he didn't see treason. P's statements no longer made sense to them. They had their answers completely.
I asked ACP Amin Mahamba whether Insp. Andrew Churu had read his statement that it was P who published and distributed it? This Amin Mahamba has nothing to say because they did this work believing that I was a traitor before anything else.
Also, I asked them about the requirements of PGO No. 1 (25) which tells them that the offences are those that are in the law and nothing else. They replied that it is true. I asked them to read the article I was charged with regarding the offence I was charged with, if in that article there is information about preventing elections, encouraging people to prevent elections? Article 151(1) regarding the government that I really threatened the government?
They said they do not know all that and I have done nothing wrong in that. They said I did nothing to threaten the government.
The judges are saying you are going too fast we are unable to write.
It is my evidence that the Executive arm of government they say I threatened them, that is the government, which means I threatened the President, Vice President, Ministers and Deputy Ministers, It could be that RC and DCs are all Executive. District and municipal directors are called District Executive Directors (DED) even their names are called Executive.
The Executive of the United Republic can be VEO or WEO, i.e. Village Executive officer and Ward Executive Officer, both of them are Executives.
And Executives can be any government employee except the Judiciary and Parliament. Therefore, section 39(2) of the Penal Code is not enforceable, no one will be spared and they cannot prove it.
That they have not said among those from the President to the village and local executive who are all part of the Government, who among them did I threaten? That section, which was enacted during the treason case of Grey Likungu Mataka & others (Bibi Titi, Chacha, etc) Versus Republic : ref Journal of African Law -1971) during the one-party rule, should no longer be part of our laws.
Honorable judges, not a single witness has said that my intention to threaten the government was implemented, not even one.
No one said that the government was very scared that day. No one said that the "IKULU HAIKALIKI" meaning leaders had to abandon the State House to go into hiding because of intimidation, fear or terror.
Section 283
They have all added things orally that are not at all in the written record submission. They have added things that are not in their statements.
It is my evidence that oral evidence that differs from the written evidence on the same matter is unreliable evidence.
That is to say, all the evidence of all the prosecution witnesses for the republic against is not credible.
Prosecutors witnesses PW1,2,3,6,9,12 and 16 are all police officers and they wrote police statements themselves and they denied it and testified against themselves. I asked them what law allowed them to do this and they claimed that is what police officers do.
Now it is my evidence that the police officers do things in their own way and evidence exhibits D1,2,5,8,12 were all written by only one police officer and was written by a fellow police officer for all the witnesses brought by the Republic.
Honorable Judges, the Ruvuma regional police officers were mentioned and written by other police officers but they were not brought before your court my Lords. If they had brought them, I would have proven to them that their statements were written correctly.
So that is my evidence. I have finished although I have dragged my feet a little. The judges are writing.
Judge Ndunguru: Now what do you say about those who have not been brought to court now?
Hon. Tundu Antipas Lissu: If they had been brought, we would have confirmed what the procedures for writing statements are. Therefore, this is unreliable evidence that is required for a big treason case like this.
The State Attorney team says we need a health break before starting the next stage, that is cross examination.
Tundu Lissu has finished his defense, the case has been adjourned for an hour and a half and is expected to resume at 14:30 hrs (pm) where Tundu Lissu will face cross-examination questions and if time permits, other defense witnesses will give their evidence.
LISSU CASE RETURNS AFTER A NOON SHORT BREAK, CHADEMA MEMBERS FILL THE COURT CHAMBER
The treason case against CHADEMA National Chairman, Tundu Antipas Lissu has returned at 14:30 hrs at the High Court, Kivukoni Front Dar es Salaam where the Republic will cross-examine the first witness, Tundu Lissu, who is standing in his defense.
Section 284
Chairman Tundu Antipas Lissu had the opportunity to speak to his team of research lawyers and witnesses for half an hour, he spoke to the Party Secretary General John John Mnyika, Amani deputy secretary general (mainland) Amani Golugwa Deputy and Brenda Rupia party publicity director.
State attorney Ajuaye Zengeli stands up and said they are ready to ask questions to the witness who is Tundu Lissu. They are ready to continue.
The judges are writing down something : befere listening cross examination questions .
Hon. Tundu Lissu is sitting in the dock. He is asked if he is ready to be questioned and we can start because he is still under oath too.
We will ask all the questions and state attprney Nasoro Katuga will start and later others from the state attorney team will join in the cross examination:
State attorney Nassoro Katuga stands up. He says to the Witness Sorry for the long testimony.
Nassoro Katuga: Did you say that we are your brothers?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: Yes, I said.
Nassoro Katuga: is it a legal matter and nothing personal, there is no difference between me and you?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: Okay.
Nassoro Katuga: You are a lawyer
Hon. Tndu Lissu: True
Nassoro Katuga: Do you have legal knowledge
Hon. Tundu Lissu : True
Nassoro Katuga: If you have any memory, in what year did Tanzania gain independence?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: On 09 December 1961
Nassoro Katuga: Is it an independent country?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: It is an independent country.
Nassoro Katuga: Which body has the final authority?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: The Court of Appeal.
Nassoro Katuga: I end up in the Court.
Tundu Lissu: That is yours, mine is the Court of Appeal.
Nassoro Katuga: So according to Article 108, what does it say?
Tundu Lissu: Yes, it is the Court of Tanzania.
Nassoro Katuga: So the Court is not appointed by anyone?
Tundu Lissu: It is not appointed
Nassoro Katuga: Are you the Chairman of CHADEMA?
Tundu Lissu: Correct
Nassoro Katuga: Were you told by this court that the chairmanship of CHADEMA has an immunity from prosecution?
Tundu Lissu: I have not told you and I do not have that immunity.
Nassoro Katuga: You mentioned many qualities that concern you that I do not dispute. What was the procedure for those awards?
Tundu Lissu: There are those that have written information and others that you are given something like the World Cup.
Nassoro Katuga: Tell these Judges all these awards?
Tundu Lissu: I have not brought them and I am not responsible
Nassoro Katuga: If you go like that, we will go for seven days.
Tundu Lissu: I have been in jail for a whole year, will I really be afraid of you for a week?
Nassoro Katuga: Now you brought your evidence of the award.
Tundu Lissu: I have not brought it, it is not my job, it is your job.
Nassoro Katuga: Now don't bring knowledge.
Tundu Lissu: I am really knowledgeable. How do you want me to bring it now?
Nassoro Katuga: Which committee said you should be released?
Tundu Lissu: The International Human Rights Committee
Nassoro Katuga: Is there any part where you have denied that those words of incitement, incitement to rebellion and especially .... you have said that those words were said in your video. Did you say they were not yours?
Tundu Lissu: I said if you want to understand them, listen to the whole speech.
Nassoro Katuga: You are my brother, I cannot ask you the question of whether you are intelligent or not like you ask people.
Tundu Lissu: If you see, you can say who forbade you. If you see that I am not intelligent, just say it or ask me and I will answer you.
Nassoro Katuga: Are these words yours or not?
Tundu Lissu: I have never denied those words, they are very much mine.
Nassoro Katuga: Have you also read history?
Tundu Lissu: Yes, I have.
Nassoro Katuga: Did they ever deceive our ancestors historically, let me remind you?
Tundu Lissu: They did not deceive you, they entered into agreements with them.
Nassoro Katuga: What were fraudulent agreements ?
Tundu Lissu: Those agreements were beneficial to the African leaders they entered into. They saw it as beneficial.
Nassoro Katuga: Weren't they colonialists?
Tundu Lissu: They were colonialists who hurt Africa just as Samia has hurt the country now.
Nassoro Katuga: You are a defender of public property. Do you remember what you said about the machine. Did you say it doesn't come out?
Tundu Lissu: You don't know anything. if you want me to ask I will tell you what I said
Nassoro Katuga: You didn't say Tanzania was sued, was it really sued, why don't I know if it was sued?
Tundu Lissu: Who told you that it was sued in international arbitration, you want me to send it to you, I will do that, no problem.
Nassoro Katuga: If I heard you, you are an expert in Electoral Laws?
Tundu Lissu: That's true
Nassoro Katuga: In Tanzania, what is the procedure for opposing a certain law?
Tundu Lissu: There are many ways? For example, opposing through protests to motivate citizens to oppose that law
Section 285
Nassoro Katuga: Don't go there
Hon. Tundu Lissu: I'm just going everywhere, protests, I know you want the Court's way.
Nassoro Katuga: Did you mention your law about the protest law?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: Article 20(1) of the Constitution says that we should oppose through assemblies and demonstrations.
Judge Procedure, slow down please. I am writing.
Hon. Tundu Lissu: These public meetings are legally permitted.
Nassoro Katuga: Let me give you to read?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: Give it to me to read. It is given to Lissu and he is reading. It's called freedom of association and assembly.
Nassoro Katuga: Do you know case of Francis Dyanabo
Hon. Tundu Lissu: I know Julius Ishengoma Francis Dyanabo went to Court to challenge the election laws
Nassoro Katuga: Did he win?
Judge, let's go back to Dyanabo.
Hon. Tundu Lissu: I know Julius Ishengoma Dyanabo personally because he filed cases challenging the election law that demands before filing an election case you have to deposit a certain amount of money.
Nassoro Katuga: What happened with Mtikila and the independent candidate?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: Now don't interrupt me, I'm answering you well. Christopher Mtikila won the High Court, the Court of Appeal overturned it and later went to the African Court in Arusha and they said there that Tanzania should allow an independent candidate. This government you serve has never corrected that to this day.
Nassoro Katuga: Now I ask you, you said that section 39 of the Penal Code, you said that overt act matters, what does it say about how many ways of manifestation?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: There are two.
Nassoro Katuga: Which one?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: Publication of a writing or printing and overt act or deed.
Nassoro Katuga: when the word or is used, does it mean that these words are used in an alternative way?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: they may be similar and they may not be similar. In this case, they are similar actions.
Nassoro Katuga: So similarities mean.
That yours is similar. So between the words or or and which one should have been used.
Hon. Tundu Lissu: That it could be read by overt act and overt act. What does it mean?
Nasoro Katuga: Read it there.
Hon. Tundu Lissu: Now what did you give me? Take these papers.
Nassoro Katuga: You are my brother, you have preceded me in the profession, wouldn't you have read the area itself if I had revealed a different page to you.
Hon. Tundu Lissu: It is not my job, I would have opened it when you wanted.
Nassoro Katuga: Now read section 13 of the Interpretation Act
Hon. Tundu Lissu: He is reading.
Nassoro Katuga: So what should we believe?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: The law is not written to be absurd
Nassoro Katuga: You said that there were things that happened to you in your struggle? I would be correct in saying that you are a person who has hatred against the government.
Hon. Tundu Lissu: I have hatred for the government of this country because it has oppressed many people.
Nassoro Katuga: So you said all that, you have hatred for the government?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: I have hatred against government oppression. I have hatred against the government, absolutely correct. They oppress people a lot.
Nassoro Katuga: As a politician, is the intention of a political party to hold power?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: It is not the only intention, it is one of the intentions.
Nassoro Katuga: We will not be finished.
Hon. Tundu Lissu: We will just finish.
Nassoro Katuga: What are the three pillars of the state?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: Executive, Parliament and the Judiciary.
Nassoro Katuga: In law, what are the responsibilities of these three pillars? Let's start with Parliament?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: Legislation
Nassoro Katuga: Now why did you want to say anything else
Hon. Tundu Lissu: I didn't want you to live in the ignorance of thinking that Parliament's only job is to enact laws, there are so many.
Nassoro Katuga: What about the job of the court?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: Interpreting laws and repealing laws.
NassoronKatuga: Answer my questions, don't educate me?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: You said I am your brother, you want me to educate you, you don't want me to educate you anymore this time?
Nassoro Katuga: What is the job of the Government?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: The Government enforces the law. So?
Nassoro Katuga: Have you given me an answer?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: So if I have given you an answer like this, where do you guys read the law?
Nassor Katuga: Let's go back to Section 39 of the Penal Code. Where the Penal Code says that a person commits an act with the intention of threatening the government. Is there a requirement in the interpretation that it must have been committed?
Section 286
Hon. Tundu Lissu: That Section does not exist but Section 10(2) does.
Nassoro Katuga: We will wait here.
Hon. Tundu Lissu: I have been here for a year and five months. Why am I afraid to wait here?
Nassoro Katuga: He laughs. Let's go to the police. They were sent by Wambura and Kingai, did you say that?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: Yes, I said that the Wamburas have been harassing me for a long time.
Nassoro Katuga: So they were sent, right? Have you heard or how did you know?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: They said it in writing themselves. They have persecuted me for a very long time. They ordered me to be arrested by Kingai and Wambura. They said it because of the writings in court.
Nassoro Katuga: You mentioned Wambura and Kingai as your witnesses?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: Yes
Nassoro Katuga: Are they good?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: I have called them to come and tell the truth. Whether they are good or not is another matter. I know you cannot bring them. They will be brought by the Court.
Nassoro Katuga: Did you say when you were arrested?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: I was arrested. You who have never been arrested cannot know if I was arrested or not?
Nassoro Katuga: How did you know?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: You open false cases for people, how will you know about the arrests.
Nassoro Katuga: You said that those who arrested you have not come because they are afraid to come and tell the truth?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: Yes
Nassoro Katuga: What is the purpose of the Preliminary Hearing?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: to distinguish between issues that are disputed and those that are not disputed.
Nassoro Katuga: Did you have preliminary arguments?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: Yes, I remember.
Nassoro Katuga: Do you know that things that are not disputed do not require proof?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: Correct.
Nassoro Katuga: Was the arrest not controversial?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: The issue of my arrest in Mbinga was not controversial but the others are controversial.
Nassoro Katuga: Because it was not controversial. When you tell the honorable judges that they were not brought in because of a specific reason, what did you want them to do?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: Lugano himself in his statement said about the arrest. The arrest in Mbinga is not an issue but whether it was legal or not is a different matter. Can't you distinguish such small things?
NassoronKatuga: You say you gave a speech to Chadema supporters on 03/04 and you said you gave this speech in front of journalists?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: It is absolutely true.
NassorobKatuga: In all your evidence, did you tell them that I spoke in front of journalists that they should not release it to the public?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: I didn't tell them at all. I should tell them so that it would be now when I wanted it to go to the public.
Nassoro Katuga: Did you want it to go to the people?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: I really wanted it to go. It was very important news.
Nassoro Katuga: You wanted your speech to be spread to the people.
Hon. Tundu Lissu: It's absolutely true.
Nassoro Katuga: Did you say you set limits that you set limits?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: I didn't set limits.
Nassoro Katuga: Did you cause it or did you allow it?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: I didn't allow it. Katuga
: P17 said they did live streaming and if those words of 03/04 did you give them prior, that is, before?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: I didn't give them because I didn't talk to them.
Nassoro Katuga: How would they know what you were going to say?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: Do you want me to say they didn't know? What will help you now? Yes, they didn't know what I was going to say.
Nassoro Katuga: Because they didn't know I would be right if I said these words that we were going to suppress it, we were going to prevent the election. They didn't know before?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: Correct.
Nassoro Katuga: The witnesses for the Republic were saying that you were wearing Kombat?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: They said yes.
Nassoro Katuga: Is there any part that you denied regarding the identification of your appearance that day that you were wearing?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: How can I deny the official Party attire. It is my attire.
Nassoro Katuga: So you wore that on that day?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: Absolutely correct.
Nassoro Katuga: I will be correct that the witnesses for the Republic correctly identified you in that video with those clothes?
Hon. TundubLissu: The witnesses for the Republic have always known me.
Nassoro Katuga: You know you are very intelligent, now let me just answer the question
Hon. Tundu Lissu: Indeed I am intelligent.
Nassoro Katuga: Let's go back to legal matters now. Do you know the principle of constructive possession, do you know it?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: I don't know it, maybe tell me.
Nassoro Katuga: That a person can be found in possession of something that he does not have but has kept for someone.
Hon. Tundu Lissu: It is possible, yes
Nassoro Katuga: Do you know the case laws, do you know something called constructive publication that you have knowledge and control?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: Now I did not have control of that publication of the Matter.
This KATUGA is going through a very difficult time. The witness's answers will make you think he is the one the lawyer is asking him. People laugh
Nassoro Katuga: Who caused the publication?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: It is PW 17. No one forced him to publish. He could have decided not to publish.
Nassoro Katuga: PW 17 said that we should have gone through you?
Hon. TundubLissu: Now the problem is you, the Government, you say I published when your witness said they published through me. Don't you see the problem there?
I beg you to stay, the rain of questions is heavy. People laugh. Hon. Lissu stays. He hasn't lost all his smile.
NassorobKatuga: If you give a speech, everyone has the right to interpret it as they see fit?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: True.
Nassoro Katuga: The words that we will prevent the election, everyone has the right to prevent it as much as they see fit? Not everyone will disrupt the election as they see fit?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: Everyone should bear their own burden. It is not my job.
Nassoro Katuga: Do you remember what P3 said.
Hon. Tundu Lissu: Who is P3, tell me how many PWs does that P3 have?
Nassoro Katuga: PW 13 do you remember saying they planned to throw stones at people and prevent the election
Hon. Tundu Lissu: He said yes, that is his.
NassorobKatuga: Are elections legal?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: Yes, but the election rules are supervised by the commission.
Nassoro Katuga: Is throwing stones at people and beating people a breach of peace?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: It is not only peace that is a breach of law too.
Nassoro Katuga: Who are the three pillars who are the custodians of peace?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: It is the Police force under the Government.
Nassoro Katuga: When you threaten to break the peace, who are the threats aimed at?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: Your question is a bit vague.
Nassoro Katuga: When you threaten, who are you targeting?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: If I target this gentleman, does he show Dr. Nshala that by threatening him, I have threatened the Police Force? No.
Nassoro Katuga: The honourable have understood, let's stop.
Hon. Tundu Lissu: They must have understood, I think it is not a lie.
Nassoro Katuga: In those words that you will prevent the election, you said it will kill democracy?
Hon. TundubLissu: If you had brought the entire three hours of the speech, you would have seen that Democracy.
Nassoro Katuga: Are you ready to believe what you say, are you ready for us to show you that video?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: You brought garbage, the court rejected it. I cannot clean up your garbage for you. You brought local things and they were rejected.
Nassoro Katuga: So are you ready for us to bring it?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: You would have brought it yourself. Where will I take it until I bring it.
Nassoro Katuga: Now tell the court, the democracy you know, everyone has the right to do what they see fit, that on voting day, whoever wants to go and whoever doesn't want to go, shouldn't go. Is that correct?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: My democracy says that if you don't want something, take action to prevent it legally, that's why protests are legally allowed.
Nassoro Katuga: What democracy is that?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: The constitution says that if you protest and prevent elections, it is completely democratic. Tell me where the law prohibits it?
Nassoro Katuga: Okay, you clever one. š
Nassoro Katuga: The constitution gave you the authority to prevent it? Read article 30. That you cannot use your right to prevent the rights of another person?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: First, I said that making a mess is not an offense in court. And the constitution is not just article 30. There are many articles in it.
Nassoro Katuga: These questions have no bad intentions, right, my brother?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: You have accused me of treason, you say your questions have no intention. How about you?
Nassoro Katuga: Should we continue or should we stop here, witness?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: Are you asking me for advice? What should the executioner and the executioner advise each other?
High Court of Tanzania
Kivukoni Front
Dar es Salaam, Tanzania
LIVE
Live coverage on 26 August 2026 :Treason Case - PART 277
Treason case No. 19605 / 2025 Republic versus Tundu Lissu.
The Chairman of CHADEMA the Party for Democracy and Development , Tundu Antipas Lissu, who is facing a treason case, is expected to conclude the first part of his defense evidence, namely the evidence in chief , on the third day of his defense.
N.B
Evidence in chief is the primary testimony given by a witness in court to support the party who called them
Today, Wednesday, August 26, 2026, Tundu Lissu is expected to conclude by highlighting the prosecution's evidence, by analyzing what he calls his weaknesses in convincing the court that it was unable to prove the charges against him to the legally required standard, i.e that is, beyond any doubt.
This stage will conclude the first part of his evidence, namely the main evidence, and enter the second part of his evidence, namely the additional evidence (cross examination).
At this stage, he will be questioned by the prosecutors with various questionnaire questions related to his primary evidence.
Tundu Lissu is facing the case at the High Court, Kivukoni Front Dar es Salaam, which is being heard by a panel of three judges, justice Dunstan Ndunguru with bench having also judges James Karayemaha and Ferdinand Kiwonde.
Court Updates
In the court Tundu Lissu's sister leading the prayers in court before the trial begins.
Tundu Lissu has entered the courtroom and as usual, people are chanting Lissu is not 'Muhaini' meaning he is not a traitor. After a short while, he speaks to John Heche the vice chairperson of CHADEMA party, ordering him to continue working hard for the party and country. I (Tundu Lissu) heard that there is a discontent among higher ranking CCM party leaders, and one bigwig has already tendered a resignation letter
UPDATES FROM COURT, Treason Case - PART 277
The. court clerk stands and mention the Criminal session No. 19605 / 2025 Republic against Tundu Lissu.
Attorney Ajuyaye Zengeli, the government state attorney, stands up introducing fellow attorneys who are Nassoro Katuga, Job Mrema, Ignas Mwinuka, Thawabu Issa, Cathbert Mbiringe and Winiwa Kasawa, the entire group represents the Republic while Tundu Antipas Lissu is present, representing himself.
Honorable judges and I am ready for the case says Tundu Antipas Lissu. And my witnesses are here, I ask them to leave but not to stay far away.
The judges are conserving and laughing a little. Vice-Chairperson John Heche, secretary general John Mnyika, Amani Golugwa and Brenda Rupia excuse themselves and leave the court room
The judges then they say let's continue with today's business.
Hon. Tundu Lissu says it wouldn't be amiss if you remind me where I left off.
Judge Dunstan Ndunguru reminds Tundu Lissu, last time you ended the day when you mentioned Bishop Pissa.
Hon. Tundu Lissu now today I want to focus on the case as presented to you by the Prosecutor. First, Your Honors, I would like to make the following introduction:
1. What kind of witnesses were brought before you my lords and what kind of weight should their evidence be given?
2. Secondly, I will discuss the evidence itself. The evidence given by these witnesses. And I will show that there is no crime of Treason and no criminal offense, so those are the two introductions.
Now, let me start with the first one about those witnesses brought by prosecutor (Republic).
During the Preliminary hearing, the prosecution brought a list of 30 witnesses. Who they said would be the ones to bring evidence to prove the charges of treason against me.
The prosecution did not bring all 30 witnesses, instead they brought only 17 witnesses.
The 13 who were not brought, were not brought for some important reason and I will mention them.
That omission of those 13 witnesses is neither insignificant nor without importance.
It is not because they are meaningless and it is not because they are unimportant.
Let me start with those who were brought before your, my Lords (judges).
Of the 17 witnesses who were brought. 8 witnesses are police officers.
The remaining 9 witnesses are protected ( anonymous / secret) witnesses.
The Court does not know their names. It does not know them at all, it does not know where they live? It does not know what they do and it does not know anything other than the anonymous names P, P1, P2 P ...
We may have had them (anonymous witnesses) throughout this case if it is ongoing because the Court does not know them and the defense does not know them at all.
Therefore, the evidence of those 9 anonymous witnesses is the evidence of people unknown to the Court or the defense, the only people who know them are the prosecutors who brought them.
SECTION 278
It is possible that those secret witnesses are police officers or anyone, they are the witnesses in the Treason case.
The 8 witnesses who are Police officers are witnesses of the Police Force led by IGP Camilius Wambura and Director of Criminal Investigations (DCI) Ramadhani Kingai with whom I have shown that I have a feud with them for more than two decades.
IGP and DCI have Personal vendetta against me, This vendetta is an Italian word meaning Hatred.
These people have had a grudge against me that is why they have brought these witnesses to give evidence of treason against me.
My lords Judges, the evidence of Witness No. 1 and No. 16 PW1 and PW 16, is very important evidence.
Not that it is weighty but it is important it shows the type of evidence that was presented.
PW 1 assistant Commissioner of Police -ACP George Bagyemu (if you hear PW you know it is Prosecution Witness) said in his evidence that, He is the one who led the investigation team of this case between April 04 and April 08, 2025.
PW1 in other words was leading the investigation the day before I was arrested. PW1 said in his evidence in chief and in cross examination that when he was leading the investigation team from that date and 04 he was in direct contact with DCI Ramadhani Kingai that is to be specific through Ramadhani Ng'azi Deputy Commissioner of Police -DCP.
In Cross Examination I asked him if he had ever contacted the Zonal Crime Officer - ZCO who is his Boss and he said no. He also said he had never contacted the Director of Public Prosecution-DPP's office because he is the one who coordinates the criminal investigation and he said caterogatilly NO
I asked him if he had contacted the Regional Security Officer-RSO who is under Tanzania Intelligence Security Sevrice-TISS, had he ever contacted him? He said No. That the Regional Security Officer said he had not done so.
The person who admitted to contacting him was DCI Ramadhani Kingai and so through DCP Ramadhani Ng'anzi,
PW1 said he formed three Investigation teams. Which are 1. Operations, 2. Intelligence and 3. Advisory.
Out of those 3 teams, the team I want to give evidence for is the Operations team which he said was involved in the arrest. I asked him if you were the one who ordered my arrest and he said no, the Chief of Investigation does not know who ordered my arrest.
How did I get arrested? He replied that he was called by DCP Ng'anzi that the suspect had been arrested in Mbinga and was being brought to Dar es Salaam.
Remember, he says he was the chief investigator at the time, now the Honorable Judges who reported that I was arrested was the one who was the liaison between him and DCI Kingai and presumably IGP Wambura.
Now it is my evidence that I was arrested on the orders of KINGAI DCI and Presumably IGP Wambura were the ones who ordered my arrest and they were the ones who fabricated the case, not these people here, he shows Katuga.
And these DCI Kingai people have been on a strategy to imprison me for the past 24 years. They have always failed. Honorable Judges, what PW 1 said was substantially proven 16 times, ACP Amin Mahamba confirmed it.
The other witnesses are PW2, PW 3, PW 6, PW 9, PW 12 and PW 15. Their evidence is generally the evidence of the people of DCI Ramadhani Kingai and IGP Camilius Wambura.
Police officers whose superiors have had a strategy to imprison me for 24 years. When you summarize this and similar evidence, it has no value.
It is the evidence of interested witnesses that needs to be corroborated by independent evidence. I want to say that this is the evidence we have and I will present it later.
Now let me talk about the evidence of witnesses who are not Police. PW4, PW 5, PW7, PW 8, PW 10, PW 11, PW13 and PW 14. These are the witnesses that no one knows except the prosecutor.
All these witnesses we have their written statements and their oral statements while they are here in Court. Except for PW 1 we do not have his written evidence but all the others we have.
Now let me go back to the secret witnesses if you leave out PW 4, all the other 7 said this in writing and while they were in court here.
PART 279
Hon. Tundu Lissu continues to give his defense.L:
1. They plotted to commit crimes during the general elections last year. All of them said so in writing, these secret witnesses and the statements were written by the Police. (Beating people, burning things) they said that. And the evidence is there with you.
2. All of them except PW4 were arrested by the Police for plotting to commit violence and they were all arrested on those four days, namely on April 4 and April 8. The Police knew about it and arrested them all within four days.
3. All of these witnesses after being arrested by the Police confessed. They confessed that they were planning to commit violence during the elections, while in court they said that they planned to commit crimes again they confessed that in writing
4. Funny enough The witnesses who were arrested as suspects, were all released so that they could continue plotting, that is, you arrest someone for a crime and you release them.
5. All of them were called by the Police PW 16 ACP Amin Mahamba and told them to agree to be witnesses against Tundu Lissu and if they agree, we will drop the charges against them.
The criminals have confessed before the Police, They were released and became witnesses against Tundu Lissu.
6. The criminals who self confessed came from Dar es Salaam, and in Dar es Salaam October (2025) 182 people were killed according to Judge Chande.
PW 10 and PW 11 came from Arusha, and in Arusha 53 people were killed according to report of Judge Mohamed Chande. PW13 and PW 14 came from Mbeya and there 80 people were killed according to Judge MOHAMED CHANDE. (The police arrested people who said they had planned to commit a crime in October 2025 and released them and that October the same crime occurred while these people were citizens.)!
Pw 5 and Pw 7 came from Songea and Judge Chande says that people also died there but he did not mention the number of those who died in Songea.
PW 16 ACP Amin Mahamba said he was on the team of investigators who investigated the October 29 2025 killings and I asked those who said they planned to commit atrocities, did you take any action against them because the riots occurred? He replied that NO, no action was taken.
My Lords, what is the LEGAL weight of the evidence of these types of criminals? This is the Government's evidence against me.
The evidence of criminals who confessed that they would commit a crime and came to Court and confessed. Then returned to where they were planning and later many people were killed on the streets. What is the weight of this type of evidence in a treason case?
These types of witnesses are totally unreliable. I will present those legal arguments in writing.
My Lords, the indictment states that I created an intention to threaten the Government of the United Republic of Tanzania and I confirmed that intention by uttering those famous words.
Now, Your Honors, in relation to this indictment and according to the legal decisions we have discussed a lot, the important thing is the presence of an intention to commit the crime of treason.
What does the evidence of the Republic say about the intention to commit the crime of treason? The witnesses who gave evidence to prove this argument are the following.
PW1, PW2, PW16 and PW17 who is P the writer with your consent I request to be given exhibits D1, D15 and D16.
A short silence passes.
The judges are writing and the exhibits are being sought.
The evidence of PW 1 ACP George Bagyemu Assistant to SACP Mafwele regarding the intention to commit the crime of treason alleged in the indictment in his evidence said that I created the intention to threaten the government.
He saw the intention to commit the crime of treason in the statement I made. He saw the intention in the words.
My Lord Judges another witness who saw that intention is PW 16 ACP Amin Mahamba. Honorable Judges Exhibit D15 his explanation The police said this ACP Mahamba said this "I together with the entire investigation team watched and listened to the video and found that there was an offence of treason and publishing false information."
SECTION 280
The State Attorney Nasoro Katuga stands up and says this is a defense and the example was thus received as Exhibit D.
It is received to show contradiction and start referring to it as a regular example. It will have a contradiction to section 163, it is for a specific purpose and if you allow it, we will use it against him. It will be harmful to both parties, we ask the Court to return to the purpose of receiving the example.
Tundu Lissu says now I should say that if it is for their pleasure, I want it to be for pleasure.
I have no problem with them just using it, the Example is related to this case and the Court must read it and look at it.
No example is taken just for the sake of cross examination, Your Honors, I am using it because it is related to the case.
Now that they have said it is their pleasure, I wonder now why they are complaining. I intentionally included it so that they can use it, I again wonder that they do not want it.
Judge Ndunguru says since the example has been included we cannot say we are preventing the use of that example. So you just go ahead, the example is already in the Court, let's use it.
Tundu Lissu says okay I will continue.
ACP Amin Mahamba has said that himself and the team watched the video and saw the offenses of treason and spreading false information.
So PW 16 saw the intention to commit the offense with PW 1, they saw the intention.
PW2 and PW 17 did they see the intention?
Honorable Judges according to Exhibit D1 John Kaaya says in the moving picture (video) I saw Tundu Lissu uttering statements with criminal indicators.
Nowhere did he talk about treason, the offense of treason and the intention of treason.
He saw the indicators of crime.
PW 17 says in his statement he says this. In that meeting, the issues being discussed were issues regarding the 2025 General Election and their agenda of No Reforms, No election and the problems they are facing in the Election. On This one he did not see any treason.
He says he saw us talking about No Reforms No Election and the problems we are facing, he did not say anything about treason at all.
PW 17 is the only witness who was present at the meeting and he did not see any wrongdoing or treason.
The second argument being argued in this case is the manifestation of that intention. The words are these, they say the same thing here, this position indicates rebellion ........ he reads aloud all of them .What is alleged to have been said are those words.
Now what does the evidence say about these words?
Regarding those words, the evidence of PW1, PW2 and PW 16 is similar to all those other witnesses saying that they saw the video with those words.
And their evidence has said that I was the one who published and sent them to Jambo TV an online Youtube TV. What does the evidence of PW 17 the eye witness say?
Witness No. 17 of the prosecution in his statement D16 says that in the meeting the issues that were discussed were about the general election and the No Reforms No Election issues.
There is no mention of it in D15, he did not see those words, he did not hear them, he did not write them down or say them here. The one who was there did not see them, he did not hear them because he did not write them down and did not say them.
If he had heard them, he would have said them, if he had seen them, he would have written them down. PW17 said here in Court and in exhibit D16 that he was the one who took the pictures and broadcasted them with four of his colleagues using SONY cameras. They are all employees of JAMBO TV. They broadcasted the meeting Live.
PW17 also said in writing and here in Court that he was the one who saved those videos on the Jambo network on Youtube, X and Instagram. He said is not me (Tundu Lissu).
Section 281
Tundu Lissu continues to give his defense.
So with the element of publication, the evidence presented by the prosecution is the same.
The witnesses who were not present said the words were spoken and the one who was present did not say the words were spoken.
The one who was present admits that the publication was made by him. The distribution is his and not someone else.
PW 17 was asked did you hear any criminal statement? He said NO.
I asked him did you hear any treasonous statement? His answer is NO.
My evidence on that publication and intention is my evidence, the witnesses who came and said I committed a crime are confusing themselves, they are saying different things themselves.
Now, Honorable Judges, this is the confusion between the words spoken or not. Was there an intention or not? What was said or not said, if there was a video itself, we could have resolved that dispute.
The onus of bringing the video was on the prosecution side (Republic), they did not bring the video.
The court will not sit and know whether everything said in the video is true or just a lie.
Proof is video, not words and that video does not exist. They have taken out two or three words, they want to say it is treason and then they have left out all the words.
They said they will bring 11 examples, they said they will bring 9 others and they will bring two that are not written. They have not brought even one. Those that are not written, physical, are empty words, and empty words do not break a bone.
And in treason case, mere words do not constitute an overt act. Words and words do not constitute treason. Khatibu Gandi alias McGhee, qoute the case. What are you doing in government offices and then you call yourself lawyers?
Honorable Judges, there are acts of procedural violations when they arrest me and the investigation of this case:
1. It is a law that the National Prosecution Act states that their Director of Public Prosecutions is the one who coordinates the criminal investigation.
Katuga says at this stage he should not go into the law there.
Lissu says I was just doing the foundation of my evidence that I want to give
Judge Ndunguru says, continue now,
we have understood each other, go directly now.
Hon. Lissu Evidence No. 1 and 16 I asked them this, the DPP coordinated this investigation, the answer is no.
They were asked again whether the DPP representative was present in the investigation team and they said no but PW 16 said there was someone with a Bantu name.
Therefore, the investigation did not involve the DPP.
Honorable Judges Witness No. 01, 02 and 16, namely George, Kaaya and ACP Mahamba, were asked that you recognize that in the PGO you have decided to respect the constitutional right to express opinions and hold assemblies and were asked to show whether they considered the rights of the accused?
I was told to show my rights in their statements and their evidence did not have anything to say about how they protected my rights.
Section 282
He says that I showed these PW1, 2 and 16 the articles of the penal code and the media law regarding it being neither incitement nor an offence to show the shortcomings of the government and oppose the government and they admitted and said yes it was not an offence. I did the work and they admitted that it was not an offence.
When I told them where they considered those articles during their investigation, they said they did not and had nothing to say about those matters.
PGO 1 (24) the main pillar is the presumption of innocence I asked them where they treated me as innocent the whole time they were with me? No one considered that at all. They were just going their own way. They thought I was already suspected and a traitor.
ON 04/04/ 2025 they saw the video namely PW1 and PW 2 namely PW 1 sent it to PW 2 and showed it to him in pieces (bits of clips). And on the same day he ordered the file to be opened. He ordered the file to be opened.
Therefore there was no presumption of innocence that Lissu had committed treason on the same day they decided that.
PW 16 ACP Amin Mahamba says that when he looked and saw treason, there was no presumption of innocence, that's why they didn't want to get advice from the DPP or the government's legal advisors.
And since they already had the answers, that's why they were asked, did you look for CHADEMA leaders and ask them? They answered NO.
Did you look for Tundu Lissu himself and ask me what I meant? They said NO.
So I say that they didn't look for me because they already saw that they had a culprit.
That's why even when they were presented with the evidence of PW 17, the one from JAMBO. He says, was the one who published and distributed it and he didn't see treason. P's statements no longer made sense to them. They had their answers completely.
I asked ACP Amin Mahamba whether Insp. Andrew Churu had read his statement that it was P who published and distributed it? This Amin Mahamba has nothing to say because they did this work believing that I was a traitor before anything else.
Also, I asked them about the requirements of PGO No. 1 (25) which tells them that the offences are those that are in the law and nothing else. They replied that it is true. I asked them to read the article I was charged with regarding the offence I was charged with, if in that article there is information about preventing elections, encouraging people to prevent elections? Article 151(1) regarding the government that I really threatened the government?
They said they do not know all that and I have done nothing wrong in that. They said I did nothing to threaten the government.
The judges are saying you are going too fast we are unable to write.
It is my evidence that the Executive arm of government they say I threatened them, that is the government, which means I threatened the President, Vice President, Ministers and Deputy Ministers, It could be that RC and DCs are all Executive. District and municipal directors are called District Executive Directors (DED) even their names are called Executive.
The Executive of the United Republic can be VEO or WEO, i.e. Village Executive officer and Ward Executive Officer, both of them are Executives.
And Executives can be any government employee except the Judiciary and Parliament. Therefore, section 39(2) of the Penal Code is not enforceable, no one will be spared and they cannot prove it.
That they have not said among those from the President to the village and local executive who are all part of the Government, who among them did I threaten? That section, which was enacted during the treason case of Grey Likungu Mataka & others (Bibi Titi, Chacha, etc) Versus Republic : ref Journal of African Law -1971) during the one-party rule, should no longer be part of our laws.
Honorable judges, not a single witness has said that my intention to threaten the government was implemented, not even one.
No one said that the government was very scared that day. No one said that the "IKULU HAIKALIKI" meaning leaders had to abandon the State House to go into hiding because of intimidation, fear or terror.
Section 283
They have all added things orally that are not at all in the written record submission. They have added things that are not in their statements.
It is my evidence that oral evidence that differs from the written evidence on the same matter is unreliable evidence.
That is to say, all the evidence of all the prosecution witnesses for the republic against is not credible.
Prosecutors witnesses PW1,2,3,6,9,12 and 16 are all police officers and they wrote police statements themselves and they denied it and testified against themselves. I asked them what law allowed them to do this and they claimed that is what police officers do.
Now it is my evidence that the police officers do things in their own way and evidence exhibits D1,2,5,8,12 were all written by only one police officer and was written by a fellow police officer for all the witnesses brought by the Republic.
Honorable Judges, the Ruvuma regional police officers were mentioned and written by other police officers but they were not brought before your court my Lords. If they had brought them, I would have proven to them that their statements were written correctly.
So that is my evidence. I have finished although I have dragged my feet a little. The judges are writing.
Judge Ndunguru: Now what do you say about those who have not been brought to court now?
Hon. Tundu Antipas Lissu: If they had been brought, we would have confirmed what the procedures for writing statements are. Therefore, this is unreliable evidence that is required for a big treason case like this.
The State Attorney team says we need a health break before starting the next stage, that is cross examination.
Tundu Lissu has finished his defense, the case has been adjourned for an hour and a half and is expected to resume at 14:30 hrs (pm) where Tundu Lissu will face cross-examination questions and if time permits, other defense witnesses will give their evidence.
LISSU CASE RETURNS AFTER A NOON SHORT BREAK, CHADEMA MEMBERS FILL THE COURT CHAMBER
The treason case against CHADEMA National Chairman, Tundu Antipas Lissu has returned at 14:30 hrs at the High Court, Kivukoni Front Dar es Salaam where the Republic will cross-examine the first witness, Tundu Lissu, who is standing in his defense.
Section 284
Chairman Tundu Antipas Lissu had the opportunity to speak to his team of research lawyers and witnesses for half an hour, he spoke to the Party Secretary General John John Mnyika, Amani deputy secretary general (mainland) Amani Golugwa Deputy and Brenda Rupia party publicity director.
State attorney Ajuaye Zengeli stands up and said they are ready to ask questions to the witness who is Tundu Lissu. They are ready to continue.
The judges are writing down something : befere listening cross examination questions .
Hon. Tundu Lissu is sitting in the dock. He is asked if he is ready to be questioned and we can start because he is still under oath too.
We will ask all the questions and state attprney Nasoro Katuga will start and later others from the state attorney team will join in the cross examination:
State attorney Nassoro Katuga stands up. He says to the Witness Sorry for the long testimony.
Nassoro Katuga: Did you say that we are your brothers?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: Yes, I said.
Nassoro Katuga: is it a legal matter and nothing personal, there is no difference between me and you?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: Okay.
Nassoro Katuga: You are a lawyer
Hon. Tndu Lissu: True
Nassoro Katuga: Do you have legal knowledge
Hon. Tundu Lissu : True
Nassoro Katuga: If you have any memory, in what year did Tanzania gain independence?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: On 09 December 1961
Nassoro Katuga: Is it an independent country?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: It is an independent country.
Nassoro Katuga: Which body has the final authority?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: The Court of Appeal.
Nassoro Katuga: I end up in the Court.
Tundu Lissu: That is yours, mine is the Court of Appeal.
Nassoro Katuga: So according to Article 108, what does it say?
Tundu Lissu: Yes, it is the Court of Tanzania.
Nassoro Katuga: So the Court is not appointed by anyone?
Tundu Lissu: It is not appointed
Nassoro Katuga: Are you the Chairman of CHADEMA?
Tundu Lissu: Correct
Nassoro Katuga: Were you told by this court that the chairmanship of CHADEMA has an immunity from prosecution?
Tundu Lissu: I have not told you and I do not have that immunity.
Nassoro Katuga: You mentioned many qualities that concern you that I do not dispute. What was the procedure for those awards?
Tundu Lissu: There are those that have written information and others that you are given something like the World Cup.
Nassoro Katuga: Tell these Judges all these awards?
Tundu Lissu: I have not brought them and I am not responsible
Nassoro Katuga: If you go like that, we will go for seven days.
Tundu Lissu: I have been in jail for a whole year, will I really be afraid of you for a week?
Nassoro Katuga: Now you brought your evidence of the award.
Tundu Lissu: I have not brought it, it is not my job, it is your job.
Nassoro Katuga: Now don't bring knowledge.
Tundu Lissu: I am really knowledgeable. How do you want me to bring it now?
Nassoro Katuga: Which committee said you should be released?
Tundu Lissu: The International Human Rights Committee
Nassoro Katuga: Is there any part where you have denied that those words of incitement, incitement to rebellion and especially .... you have said that those words were said in your video. Did you say they were not yours?
Tundu Lissu: I said if you want to understand them, listen to the whole speech.
Nassoro Katuga: You are my brother, I cannot ask you the question of whether you are intelligent or not like you ask people.
Tundu Lissu: If you see, you can say who forbade you. If you see that I am not intelligent, just say it or ask me and I will answer you.
Nassoro Katuga: Are these words yours or not?
Tundu Lissu: I have never denied those words, they are very much mine.
Nassoro Katuga: Have you also read history?
Tundu Lissu: Yes, I have.
Nassoro Katuga: Did they ever deceive our ancestors historically, let me remind you?
Tundu Lissu: They did not deceive you, they entered into agreements with them.
Nassoro Katuga: What were fraudulent agreements ?
Tundu Lissu: Those agreements were beneficial to the African leaders they entered into. They saw it as beneficial.
Nassoro Katuga: Weren't they colonialists?
Tundu Lissu: They were colonialists who hurt Africa just as Samia has hurt the country now.
Nassoro Katuga: You are a defender of public property. Do you remember what you said about the machine. Did you say it doesn't come out?
Tundu Lissu: You don't know anything. if you want me to ask I will tell you what I said
Nassoro Katuga: You didn't say Tanzania was sued, was it really sued, why don't I know if it was sued?
Tundu Lissu: Who told you that it was sued in international arbitration, you want me to send it to you, I will do that, no problem.
Nassoro Katuga: If I heard you, you are an expert in Electoral Laws?
Tundu Lissu: That's true
Nassoro Katuga: In Tanzania, what is the procedure for opposing a certain law?
Tundu Lissu: There are many ways? For example, opposing through protests to motivate citizens to oppose that law
Section 285
Nassoro Katuga: Don't go there
Hon. Tundu Lissu: I'm just going everywhere, protests, I know you want the Court's way.
Nassoro Katuga: Did you mention your law about the protest law?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: Article 20(1) of the Constitution says that we should oppose through assemblies and demonstrations.
Judge Procedure, slow down please. I am writing.
Hon. Tundu Lissu: These public meetings are legally permitted.
Nassoro Katuga: Let me give you to read?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: Give it to me to read. It is given to Lissu and he is reading. It's called freedom of association and assembly.
Nassoro Katuga: Do you know case of Francis Dyanabo
Hon. Tundu Lissu: I know Julius Ishengoma Francis Dyanabo went to Court to challenge the election laws
Nassoro Katuga: Did he win?
Judge, let's go back to Dyanabo.
Hon. Tundu Lissu: I know Julius Ishengoma Dyanabo personally because he filed cases challenging the election law that demands before filing an election case you have to deposit a certain amount of money.
Nassoro Katuga: What happened with Mtikila and the independent candidate?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: Now don't interrupt me, I'm answering you well. Christopher Mtikila won the High Court, the Court of Appeal overturned it and later went to the African Court in Arusha and they said there that Tanzania should allow an independent candidate. This government you serve has never corrected that to this day.
Nassoro Katuga: Now I ask you, you said that section 39 of the Penal Code, you said that overt act matters, what does it say about how many ways of manifestation?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: There are two.
Nassoro Katuga: Which one?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: Publication of a writing or printing and overt act or deed.
Nassoro Katuga: when the word or is used, does it mean that these words are used in an alternative way?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: they may be similar and they may not be similar. In this case, they are similar actions.
Nassoro Katuga: So similarities mean.
That yours is similar. So between the words or or and which one should have been used.
Hon. Tundu Lissu: That it could be read by overt act and overt act. What does it mean?
Nasoro Katuga: Read it there.
Hon. Tundu Lissu: Now what did you give me? Take these papers.
Nassoro Katuga: You are my brother, you have preceded me in the profession, wouldn't you have read the area itself if I had revealed a different page to you.
Hon. Tundu Lissu: It is not my job, I would have opened it when you wanted.
Nassoro Katuga: Now read section 13 of the Interpretation Act
Hon. Tundu Lissu: He is reading.
Nassoro Katuga: So what should we believe?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: The law is not written to be absurd
Nassoro Katuga: You said that there were things that happened to you in your struggle? I would be correct in saying that you are a person who has hatred against the government.
Hon. Tundu Lissu: I have hatred for the government of this country because it has oppressed many people.
Nassoro Katuga: So you said all that, you have hatred for the government?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: I have hatred against government oppression. I have hatred against the government, absolutely correct. They oppress people a lot.
Nassoro Katuga: As a politician, is the intention of a political party to hold power?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: It is not the only intention, it is one of the intentions.
Nassoro Katuga: We will not be finished.
Hon. Tundu Lissu: We will just finish.
Nassoro Katuga: What are the three pillars of the state?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: Executive, Parliament and the Judiciary.
Nassoro Katuga: In law, what are the responsibilities of these three pillars? Let's start with Parliament?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: Legislation
Nassoro Katuga: Now why did you want to say anything else
Hon. Tundu Lissu: I didn't want you to live in the ignorance of thinking that Parliament's only job is to enact laws, there are so many.
Nassoro Katuga: What about the job of the court?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: Interpreting laws and repealing laws.
NassoronKatuga: Answer my questions, don't educate me?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: You said I am your brother, you want me to educate you, you don't want me to educate you anymore this time?
Nassoro Katuga: What is the job of the Government?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: The Government enforces the law. So?
Nassoro Katuga: Have you given me an answer?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: So if I have given you an answer like this, where do you guys read the law?
Nassor Katuga: Let's go back to Section 39 of the Penal Code. Where the Penal Code says that a person commits an act with the intention of threatening the government. Is there a requirement in the interpretation that it must have been committed?
Section 286
Hon. Tundu Lissu: That Section does not exist but Section 10(2) does.
Nassoro Katuga: We will wait here.
Hon. Tundu Lissu: I have been here for a year and five months. Why am I afraid to wait here?
Nassoro Katuga: He laughs. Let's go to the police. They were sent by Wambura and Kingai, did you say that?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: Yes, I said that the Wamburas have been harassing me for a long time.
Nassoro Katuga: So they were sent, right? Have you heard or how did you know?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: They said it in writing themselves. They have persecuted me for a very long time. They ordered me to be arrested by Kingai and Wambura. They said it because of the writings in court.
Nassoro Katuga: You mentioned Wambura and Kingai as your witnesses?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: Yes
Nassoro Katuga: Are they good?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: I have called them to come and tell the truth. Whether they are good or not is another matter. I know you cannot bring them. They will be brought by the Court.
Nassoro Katuga: Did you say when you were arrested?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: I was arrested. You who have never been arrested cannot know if I was arrested or not?
Nassoro Katuga: How did you know?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: You open false cases for people, how will you know about the arrests.
Nassoro Katuga: You said that those who arrested you have not come because they are afraid to come and tell the truth?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: Yes
Nassoro Katuga: What is the purpose of the Preliminary Hearing?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: to distinguish between issues that are disputed and those that are not disputed.
Nassoro Katuga: Did you have preliminary arguments?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: Yes, I remember.
Nassoro Katuga: Do you know that things that are not disputed do not require proof?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: Correct.
Nassoro Katuga: Was the arrest not controversial?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: The issue of my arrest in Mbinga was not controversial but the others are controversial.
Nassoro Katuga: Because it was not controversial. When you tell the honorable judges that they were not brought in because of a specific reason, what did you want them to do?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: Lugano himself in his statement said about the arrest. The arrest in Mbinga is not an issue but whether it was legal or not is a different matter. Can't you distinguish such small things?
NassoronKatuga: You say you gave a speech to Chadema supporters on 03/04 and you said you gave this speech in front of journalists?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: It is absolutely true.
NassorobKatuga: In all your evidence, did you tell them that I spoke in front of journalists that they should not release it to the public?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: I didn't tell them at all. I should tell them so that it would be now when I wanted it to go to the public.
Nassoro Katuga: Did you want it to go to the people?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: I really wanted it to go. It was very important news.
Nassoro Katuga: You wanted your speech to be spread to the people.
Hon. Tundu Lissu: It's absolutely true.
Nassoro Katuga: Did you say you set limits that you set limits?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: I didn't set limits.
Nassoro Katuga: Did you cause it or did you allow it?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: I didn't allow it. Katuga
: P17 said they did live streaming and if those words of 03/04 did you give them prior, that is, before?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: I didn't give them because I didn't talk to them.
Nassoro Katuga: How would they know what you were going to say?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: Do you want me to say they didn't know? What will help you now? Yes, they didn't know what I was going to say.
Nassoro Katuga: Because they didn't know I would be right if I said these words that we were going to suppress it, we were going to prevent the election. They didn't know before?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: Correct.
Nassoro Katuga: The witnesses for the Republic were saying that you were wearing Kombat?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: They said yes.
Nassoro Katuga: Is there any part that you denied regarding the identification of your appearance that day that you were wearing?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: How can I deny the official Party attire. It is my attire.
Nassoro Katuga: So you wore that on that day?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: Absolutely correct.
Nassoro Katuga: I will be correct that the witnesses for the Republic correctly identified you in that video with those clothes?
Hon. TundubLissu: The witnesses for the Republic have always known me.
Nassoro Katuga: You know you are very intelligent, now let me just answer the question
Hon. Tundu Lissu: Indeed I am intelligent.
Nassoro Katuga: Let's go back to legal matters now. Do you know the principle of constructive possession, do you know it?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: I don't know it, maybe tell me.
Nassoro Katuga: That a person can be found in possession of something that he does not have but has kept for someone.
Hon. Tundu Lissu: It is possible, yes
Nassoro Katuga: Do you know the case laws, do you know something called constructive publication that you have knowledge and control?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: Now I did not have control of that publication of the Matter.
This KATUGA is going through a very difficult time. The witness's answers will make you think he is the one the lawyer is asking him. People laugh
Nassoro Katuga: Who caused the publication?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: It is PW 17. No one forced him to publish. He could have decided not to publish.
Nassoro Katuga: PW 17 said that we should have gone through you?
Hon. TundubLissu: Now the problem is you, the Government, you say I published when your witness said they published through me. Don't you see the problem there?
I beg you to stay, the rain of questions is heavy. People laugh. Hon. Lissu stays. He hasn't lost all his smile.
NassorobKatuga: If you give a speech, everyone has the right to interpret it as they see fit?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: True.
Nassoro Katuga: The words that we will prevent the election, everyone has the right to prevent it as much as they see fit? Not everyone will disrupt the election as they see fit?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: Everyone should bear their own burden. It is not my job.
Nassoro Katuga: Do you remember what P3 said.
Hon. Tundu Lissu: Who is P3, tell me how many PWs does that P3 have?
Nassoro Katuga: PW 13 do you remember saying they planned to throw stones at people and prevent the election
Hon. Tundu Lissu: He said yes, that is his.
NassorobKatuga: Are elections legal?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: Yes, but the election rules are supervised by the commission.
Nassoro Katuga: Is throwing stones at people and beating people a breach of peace?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: It is not only peace that is a breach of law too.
Nassoro Katuga: Who are the three pillars who are the custodians of peace?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: It is the Police force under the Government.
Nassoro Katuga: When you threaten to break the peace, who are the threats aimed at?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: Your question is a bit vague.
Nassoro Katuga: When you threaten, who are you targeting?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: If I target this gentleman, does he show Dr. Nshala that by threatening him, I have threatened the Police Force? No.
Nassoro Katuga: The honourable have understood, let's stop.
Hon. Tundu Lissu: They must have understood, I think it is not a lie.
Nassoro Katuga: In those words that you will prevent the election, you said it will kill democracy?
Hon. TundubLissu: If you had brought the entire three hours of the speech, you would have seen that Democracy.
Nassoro Katuga: Are you ready to believe what you say, are you ready for us to show you that video?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: You brought garbage, the court rejected it. I cannot clean up your garbage for you. You brought local things and they were rejected.
Nassoro Katuga: So are you ready for us to bring it?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: You would have brought it yourself. Where will I take it until I bring it.
Nassoro Katuga: Now tell the court, the democracy you know, everyone has the right to do what they see fit, that on voting day, whoever wants to go and whoever doesn't want to go, shouldn't go. Is that correct?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: My democracy says that if you don't want something, take action to prevent it legally, that's why protests are legally allowed.
Nassoro Katuga: What democracy is that?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: The constitution says that if you protest and prevent elections, it is completely democratic. Tell me where the law prohibits it?
Nassoro Katuga: Okay, you clever one. š
Nassoro Katuga: The constitution gave you the authority to prevent it? Read article 30. That you cannot use your right to prevent the rights of another person?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: First, I said that making a mess is not an offense in court. And the constitution is not just article 30. There are many articles in it.
Nassoro Katuga: These questions have no bad intentions, right, my brother?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: You have accused me of treason, you say your questions have no intention. How about you?
Nassoro Katuga: Should we continue or should we stop here, witness?
Hon. Tundu Lissu: Are you asking me for advice? What should the executioner and the executioner advise each other?
Allen Kilewella
JF-Expert Member
- Sep 30, 2011
- 25,982
- 51,157
Achana na hiyo akaunti ya Tlaatlaah ni ya kundi siyo mtu mmoja huyo.
KERATO MOMBAA
JF-Expert Member
- Feb 4, 2025
- 4,602
- 6,274
Tlaatlaah
JF-Expert Member
- May 18, 2023
- 51,453
- 41,274
unampotosha mdau innocent kabisa wa JF gentleman, plz acheni kuvunja haki za binadamu namna hiyo gentleman š
Allen Kilewella
JF-Expert Member
- Sep 30, 2011
- 25,982
- 51,157
Unajifanya "inside man" kumbe wenye chama chao wala hawakujuiššš
Tlaatlaah
JF-Expert Member
- May 18, 2023
- 51,453
- 41,274
una maanisha nini gentleman kwa mfano dhidi ya hoja mahususi mezani?š
Manyanza
Platinum Member
- Nov 4, 2010
- 22,269
- 58,563
TUNDU LISSU ANAENDELEA KUJITETEA MAHAKAMANI
Ambapo Dar es Salaam waliuawa watu zaidi ya 300 katika uchaguzi wa Oktoba mwaka jana.
Na wawili, PW5 na PW10, walitoka Arusha, na huko Arusha, kwa mujibu wa Jaji Chande, waliuawa watu 53.
Na wawili walitoka Mbeya, ambapo kwa mujibu wa Jaji Othman Chande, huko Mbeya waliuawa watu 80.
Songea walitoka mashahidi wawili, PW5 na PW7, na kwa mujibu wa Tume ya Jaji Othman Chande, Songea pia waliuawa watu, lakini idadi yake hawakuitaja.
Waheshimiwa Majaji, PW16, ACP Amini Mahamba, mbele ya Mahakama hii alisema yeye alikuwa katika timu ya upelelezi ya matukio ya mauaji ya Oktoba 29.
Nikamuuliza, hawa waliosema watafanya fujo, na fujo zikatokea, watu wakauwawa namna hii, mmewachukulia hatua yoyote? Jibu lake lilikuwa: Hapana.
Waheshimiwa Majaji, ushahidi wa wahalifu wa namna hii una uzito kiasi gani kisheria?
Huu ndiyo ushahidi wa Serikali dhidi yangu.
Ushahidi wa mashahidi waliokiri uhalifu, wakakamatwa, wakakiri, wakaachiwa, wakarudi katika maeneo yao kufanya uhalifu na watu wakauwawa, ni ushahidi wa namna gani?
Ushahidi wa namna hii, kwa kusema kwa pole, ni totally unsafe and totally unreliable.
Waheshimiwa Majaji, shitaka dhidi yangu linasema kwamba nilitengeneza nia ya kuitishia Serikali ya Jamhuri ya Muungano.
Na nikathibitisha (manifest) nia hiyo kwa kutamka yale maneno maarufu.
Sasa, Waheshimiwa Majaji, kuhusiana na shitaka hili na kwa mujibu wa maamuzi ya kisheria ambayo tumeyazungumza sana mbele yenu ya Grey, Makungu na Ghandi.
Kuhusu utiifu kwa Serikali, hilo halina mjadala.
Lakini zinasemaje kuhusu nia ya kutenda kosa la uhaini?
Kwenye hoja hii, Waheshimiwa Majaji, mashahidi waliotoa ushahidi kuthibitisha ni PW1 George Byagemu, PW2 Inspector John Kahaya, PW16 ACP Amini Mahamba na PW17, mwandishi wa habari.
Waheshimiwa Majaji, kwa ridhaa yenu, naomba nipatiwe vielelezo D1, D15 na D16.
Waheshimiwa Majaji, kielelezo D1 ni maelezo ya onyo ya PW2 John Kahaya.
Jaji Ndunguru: Twende taratibu.
Lissu: Nimesema nipatiwe kielelezo D1, maelezo ya John Kahaya, na D15, maelezo ya Amini Mahamba, na maelezo ya shahidi wa 17.
Jaji Ndunguru: Umeshapewa?
Lissu: Sinapewa bado.
Jaji Ndunguru: Upande wa Mashitaka mnalolote?
Mawakili wa Serikali: Apewe, Mheshimiwa.
Lissu: Waheshimiwa Majaji, PW1 ni shahidi pekee ambaye maelezo yake hayakuwasilishwa Mahakamani.
Waheshimiwa Majaji, PW1 katika ushahidi wake alisema mimi nimetengeneza nia ya kuitishia Serikali ya Jamhuri ya Muungano kwa kuhamisha, kusimamisha uchaguzi, na kwamba Serikali ndiyo inasimamia uchaguzi, kwa hiyo akaona nia katika inayodaiwa kuwa kauli niliyoitoa.
Waheshimiwa Majaji, shahidi mwingine aliyeona nia hiyo ni PW16 Amini Mahamba.
Waheshimiwa Majaji, kwenye kielelezo D15, maelezo yake ya onyo Polisi alisema maneno yafuatayo:
āKuonyesha kwamba nilikuwa na nia ya kutenda hilo kosa la uhaini.ā
āMimi pamoja na timu nzima ya upelelezi tuliitizama na kusikikiza video hiyo, ndiyo tulipobaini kuna makosa ya jinai, kosa la kwanza ni uhaini na kuchapisha na kusambaza taarifa za uongo.ā
Wakili wa Serikali, Nassoro Katuga: Samahani, Waheshimiwa Majaji, kielelezo hiki kimepokelewa kwa mujibu wa kifungu 163 cha Sheria ya Ushahidi kuanza kurejea na kutumia kama content yake itakuwa ina contradict, kwa sababu kilitumika kwa mazingira maalumu.
Sasa anakirejea kwa misingi ipi na sisi tunakitumia dhidi yake?
Kama anachokifanya ni sahihi kwa uelewa wake wa sheria, itakula pande zote mbili.
Mimi nilidhani anacontradict tu kielelezo.
Sasa yeye anakisoma baada ya kuwa kimepokelewa. Je, kwa misingi ipi?
Sisi tunataka kukitumia kielelezo hiki dhidi yake.
Tunaomba Mahakama itoe mwongozo.
Waheshimiwa, ni hayo tu.
(Anakaa chini.)
Anasimama tena Wakili wa Serikali, Nassoro Katuga:
Waheshimiwa, ni kwamba ilikuwa ni kwa ajili ya ku-contradict.
Lissu: Nianze kwa wao kusema itakuwa furaha. Mimi nitakuwa more happy wakikitumia.
Wanasema watakitumia pia dhidi yangu, sasa mimi nasema Mahakama itoe ruhusa wao wakitumie dhidi yangu.
Waheshimiwa Majaji, kielelezo kilitengenezwa kwa ajili ya kesi hii.
Hawakutaka kisomwe ili nisiweze kumuhoji shahidi wao, ila Mahakama ilishakipokea na kielelezo kipo kwa ajili ya ushahidi.
Kama kielelezo kipo kwa ajili ya kesi, nitakitumia kwa ajili ya kesi.
WEKA EMOJI KAMA UNASOMA
SHARE ZAIDI UJUMBE UFIKE MBALI
Ambapo Dar es Salaam waliuawa watu zaidi ya 300 katika uchaguzi wa Oktoba mwaka jana.
Na wawili, PW5 na PW10, walitoka Arusha, na huko Arusha, kwa mujibu wa Jaji Chande, waliuawa watu 53.
Na wawili walitoka Mbeya, ambapo kwa mujibu wa Jaji Othman Chande, huko Mbeya waliuawa watu 80.
Songea walitoka mashahidi wawili, PW5 na PW7, na kwa mujibu wa Tume ya Jaji Othman Chande, Songea pia waliuawa watu, lakini idadi yake hawakuitaja.
Waheshimiwa Majaji, PW16, ACP Amini Mahamba, mbele ya Mahakama hii alisema yeye alikuwa katika timu ya upelelezi ya matukio ya mauaji ya Oktoba 29.
Nikamuuliza, hawa waliosema watafanya fujo, na fujo zikatokea, watu wakauwawa namna hii, mmewachukulia hatua yoyote? Jibu lake lilikuwa: Hapana.
Waheshimiwa Majaji, ushahidi wa wahalifu wa namna hii una uzito kiasi gani kisheria?
Huu ndiyo ushahidi wa Serikali dhidi yangu.
Ushahidi wa mashahidi waliokiri uhalifu, wakakamatwa, wakakiri, wakaachiwa, wakarudi katika maeneo yao kufanya uhalifu na watu wakauwawa, ni ushahidi wa namna gani?
Ushahidi wa namna hii, kwa kusema kwa pole, ni totally unsafe and totally unreliable.
Waheshimiwa Majaji, shitaka dhidi yangu linasema kwamba nilitengeneza nia ya kuitishia Serikali ya Jamhuri ya Muungano.
Na nikathibitisha (manifest) nia hiyo kwa kutamka yale maneno maarufu.
Sasa, Waheshimiwa Majaji, kuhusiana na shitaka hili na kwa mujibu wa maamuzi ya kisheria ambayo tumeyazungumza sana mbele yenu ya Grey, Makungu na Ghandi.
Kuhusu utiifu kwa Serikali, hilo halina mjadala.
Lakini zinasemaje kuhusu nia ya kutenda kosa la uhaini?
Kwenye hoja hii, Waheshimiwa Majaji, mashahidi waliotoa ushahidi kuthibitisha ni PW1 George Byagemu, PW2 Inspector John Kahaya, PW16 ACP Amini Mahamba na PW17, mwandishi wa habari.
Waheshimiwa Majaji, kwa ridhaa yenu, naomba nipatiwe vielelezo D1, D15 na D16.
Waheshimiwa Majaji, kielelezo D1 ni maelezo ya onyo ya PW2 John Kahaya.
Jaji Ndunguru: Twende taratibu.
Lissu: Nimesema nipatiwe kielelezo D1, maelezo ya John Kahaya, na D15, maelezo ya Amini Mahamba, na maelezo ya shahidi wa 17.
Jaji Ndunguru: Umeshapewa?
Lissu: Sinapewa bado.
Jaji Ndunguru: Upande wa Mashitaka mnalolote?
Mawakili wa Serikali: Apewe, Mheshimiwa.
Lissu: Waheshimiwa Majaji, PW1 ni shahidi pekee ambaye maelezo yake hayakuwasilishwa Mahakamani.
Waheshimiwa Majaji, PW1 katika ushahidi wake alisema mimi nimetengeneza nia ya kuitishia Serikali ya Jamhuri ya Muungano kwa kuhamisha, kusimamisha uchaguzi, na kwamba Serikali ndiyo inasimamia uchaguzi, kwa hiyo akaona nia katika inayodaiwa kuwa kauli niliyoitoa.
Waheshimiwa Majaji, shahidi mwingine aliyeona nia hiyo ni PW16 Amini Mahamba.
Waheshimiwa Majaji, kwenye kielelezo D15, maelezo yake ya onyo Polisi alisema maneno yafuatayo:
āKuonyesha kwamba nilikuwa na nia ya kutenda hilo kosa la uhaini.ā
āMimi pamoja na timu nzima ya upelelezi tuliitizama na kusikikiza video hiyo, ndiyo tulipobaini kuna makosa ya jinai, kosa la kwanza ni uhaini na kuchapisha na kusambaza taarifa za uongo.ā
Wakili wa Serikali, Nassoro Katuga: Samahani, Waheshimiwa Majaji, kielelezo hiki kimepokelewa kwa mujibu wa kifungu 163 cha Sheria ya Ushahidi kuanza kurejea na kutumia kama content yake itakuwa ina contradict, kwa sababu kilitumika kwa mazingira maalumu.
Sasa anakirejea kwa misingi ipi na sisi tunakitumia dhidi yake?
Kama anachokifanya ni sahihi kwa uelewa wake wa sheria, itakula pande zote mbili.
Mimi nilidhani anacontradict tu kielelezo.
Sasa yeye anakisoma baada ya kuwa kimepokelewa. Je, kwa misingi ipi?
Sisi tunataka kukitumia kielelezo hiki dhidi yake.
Tunaomba Mahakama itoe mwongozo.
Waheshimiwa, ni hayo tu.
(Anakaa chini.)
Anasimama tena Wakili wa Serikali, Nassoro Katuga:
Waheshimiwa, ni kwamba ilikuwa ni kwa ajili ya ku-contradict.
Lissu: Nianze kwa wao kusema itakuwa furaha. Mimi nitakuwa more happy wakikitumia.
Wanasema watakitumia pia dhidi yangu, sasa mimi nasema Mahakama itoe ruhusa wao wakitumie dhidi yangu.
Waheshimiwa Majaji, kielelezo kilitengenezwa kwa ajili ya kesi hii.
Hawakutaka kisomwe ili nisiweze kumuhoji shahidi wao, ila Mahakama ilishakipokea na kielelezo kipo kwa ajili ya ushahidi.
Kama kielelezo kipo kwa ajili ya kesi, nitakitumia kwa ajili ya kesi.
WEKA EMOJI KAMA UNASOMA
SHARE ZAIDI UJUMBE UFIKE MBALI
Tlaatlaah
JF-Expert Member
- May 18, 2023
- 51,453
- 41,274
š
SankaraBoukaka
JF-Expert Member
- Jul 2, 2019
- 3,577
- 5,664
Siye shida yetu HUKUMU tu tuione na kuishuhudia..
zipompa
JF-Expert Member
- Aug 19, 2014
- 12,508
- 27,663
utajuliwa wap spana wewe na yeye wote elimu za hapa na pale
Idimulwa
Platinum Member
- May 27, 2011
- 6,351
- 5,556
Hilo ni tatizo kiutendaji...tena kubwa....,'Uviziaji/Opportunist'..badala ya kusimamia Sheria na Misingi ya kazi...
Moja ya Tatizo kubwa sana lililotengenezwa na CCM.
mrxtz2026
JF-Expert Member
- Jan 24, 2026
- 609
- 1,314
Peleka moto Waufukweni
