DahMajibu
Responding to the Embassy of Tanzania’s Note Verbale dated 25 November 2025.
1. “The Government is concerned the EU did not give it an opportunity to present its side.”
Rebuttal:
A government that shuts down domestic media, censors all journalism about the October 29–Nov 3 killings, blocks observers, and arrests witnesses cannot claim it is being denied an opportunity to speak. The EU hearing exists precisely because Tanzania has refused to allow free reporting or independent investigations internally.
What the government calls “not given an opportunity” is actually:
•victims not being allowed to speak,
•civil society being threatened,
•opposition leaders being detained, and
•state machinery blocking truth-finding.
The EU cannot wait for a regime that is actively suppressing evidence.
2. “Proceeding without Tanzania’s views is inconsistent with the Cotonou Agreement and partnership dialogue.”
Rebuttal:
The Cotonou/OACPS–EU framework does not oblige the @EUinTZ to seek permission from a state before condemning killings or human rights violations. Dialogue is not a shield against accountability.
The government selectively quotes “dialogue” while ignoring:
•human rights clauses of the same agreement,
•obligations to prevent killings,
•obligations to protect political rights,
•the fact that dialogue does not supersede fundamental rights.
Th @EU_Commission is fully within its legal and moral mandate to deliberate on mass atrocities without waiting for perpetrators to dictate the schedule.
3. “Natural justice requires hearing both sides before conclusions are drawn.”
Rebuttal:
Natural justice begins at home. If Tanzania respected this principle:
•protesters would not have been shot,
•detainees would not be held incommunicado,
•@TunduALissu would not be isolated under CCTV surveillance,
•journalists would not be threatened,
•families of victims would not be denied information about their loved ones.
A government committing violations cannot invoke “natural justice” only when facing international scrutiny, while denying the same rights to its own citizens.
4. “The EU risks relying on unverified and one-sided narratives.”
Rebuttal:
This claim collapses instantly under scrutiny.
The evidence of abuses is:
•video-recorded,
•geo-verified,
•documented by hospitals treating gunshot victims,
•supported by eyewitnesses,
•corroborated by international organizations,
•acknowledged even by government insiders who have fled.
The only “unverified narrative” is the government’s shifting explanations, including:
•denying deaths,
•then admitting casualties,
•then blaming “outsiders”,
•then blaming “opposition incitement”,
•then claiming “no protests were authorized”.
None of these contradictions discredit the documented facts of killings.
5. “Tanzania has established a National Commission of Enquiry.”
Rebuttal:
The government is asking the world to trust a Commission that:
•has no publicly released terms of reference,
•is not independent of the Executive,
•excludes victims, opposition, civil society, and independent observers,
•lacks transparency,
•has historically been used to bury cases.
Calling this Commission “independent” is misleading. It is not credible by international standards (UN, AU, ACHPR) and cannot replace an impartial investigation.
6. “Tanzania remains committed to democracy, human rights, and the rule of law.”
Rebuttal:
Actions matter more than words.
No democratic government:
•shoots unarmed civilians,
•detains elected leaders for political reasons,
•blocks opposition rallies nationwide,
•manipulates the media through threats,
•invokes cybercrime laws to arrest group admins,
•shuts down the internet during political crises.
Commitment to human rights cannot coexist with extrajudicial killings and systematic repression.
This statement is diplomatic theatre, not reality.
Eti manyonyo !!🙌😁😁Wazungu nao wamewajibu kibabe hadi rahaaa.. Unafungia mitandao. Unakandamiza vyombo vya habari unataka ww tukusikilize 😀😀😀Wazungu kabieni hapo hapo kwa juu mpaka manyonyo atoe mlio
Kama nawaona wale maustaadh ubuabuaYenyewe inalia inaomba haki ya kusikilizwa, lakini yenyewe imekataa kata kata kusikiliza matakwa ya wananchi wake, kweli "mkuki kwa nguruwe, kwa binadamu mchungu"
Na ile rumbling ya KABUDI jana kumbe bure tu!!!!!!!!! Wanajipongeza ati tutashinda tu, haaa, kumbe mioyoni uongoooo!!!!!!Majibu
Responding to the Embassy of Tanzania’s Note Verbale dated 25 November 2025.
1. “The Government is concerned the EU did not give it an opportunity to present its side.”
Rebuttal:
A government that shuts down domestic media, censors all journalism about the October 29–Nov 3 killings, blocks observers, and arrests witnesses cannot claim it is being denied an opportunity to speak. The EU hearing exists precisely because Tanzania has refused to allow free reporting or independent investigations internally.
What the government calls “not given an opportunity” is actually:
•victims not being allowed to speak,
•civil society being threatened,
•opposition leaders being detained, and
•state machinery blocking truth-finding.
The EU cannot wait for a regime that is actively suppressing evidence.
2. “Proceeding without Tanzania’s views is inconsistent with the Cotonou Agreement and partnership dialogue.”
Rebuttal:
The Cotonou/OACPS–EU framework does not oblige the @EUinTZ to seek permission from a state before condemning killings or human rights violations. Dialogue is not a shield against accountability.
The government selectively quotes “dialogue” while ignoring:
•human rights clauses of the same agreement,
•obligations to prevent killings,
•obligations to protect political rights,
•the fact that dialogue does not supersede fundamental rights.
Th @EU_Commission is fully within its legal and moral mandate to deliberate on mass atrocities without waiting for perpetrators to dictate the schedule.
3. “Natural justice requires hearing both sides before conclusions are drawn.”
Rebuttal:
Natural justice begins at home. If Tanzania respected this principle:
•protesters would not have been shot,
•detainees would not be held incommunicado,
•@TunduALissu would not be isolated under CCTV surveillance,
•journalists would not be threatened,
•families of victims would not be denied information about their loved ones.
A government committing violations cannot invoke “natural justice” only when facing international scrutiny, while denying the same rights to its own citizens.
4. “The EU risks relying on unverified and one-sided narratives.”
Rebuttal:
This claim collapses instantly under scrutiny.
The evidence of abuses is:
•video-recorded,
•geo-verified,
•documented by hospitals treating gunshot victims,
•supported by eyewitnesses,
•corroborated by international organizations,
•acknowledged even by government insiders who have fled.
The only “unverified narrative” is the government’s shifting explanations, including:
•denying deaths,
•then admitting casualties,
•then blaming “outsiders”,
•then blaming “opposition incitement”,
•then claiming “no protests were authorized”.
None of these contradictions discredit the documented facts of killings.
5. “Tanzania has established a National Commission of Enquiry.”
Rebuttal:
The government is asking the world to trust a Commission that:
•has no publicly released terms of reference,
•is not independent of the Executive,
•excludes victims, opposition, civil society, and independent observers,
•lacks transparency,
•has historically been used to bury cases.
Calling this Commission “independent” is misleading. It is not credible by international standards (UN, AU, ACHPR) and cannot replace an impartial investigation.
6. “Tanzania remains committed to democracy, human rights, and the rule of law.”
Rebuttal:
Actions matter more than words.
No democratic government:
•shoots unarmed civilians,
•detains elected leaders for political reasons,
•blocks opposition rallies nationwide,
•manipulates the media through threats,
•invokes cybercrime laws to arrest group admins,
•shuts down the internet during political crises.
Commitment to human rights cannot coexist with extrajudicial killings and systematic repression.
This statement is diplomatic theatre, not reality.
UbinafsiYenyewe inalia inaomba haki ya kusikilizwa, lakini yenyewe imekataa kata kata kusikiliza matakwa ya wananchi wake, kweli "mkuki kwa nguruwe, kwa binadamu mchungu"
Wale wakipewa hata tende tu,wanaweza kumkana hata mtume 😅Kama nawaona wale maustaadh ubuabua
Piga kabali mpaka mtu ajinyee[emoji1787][emoji1787]Wazungu nao wamewajibu kibabe hadi rahaaa.. Unafungia mitandao. Unakandamiza vyombo vya habari unataka ww tukusikilize [emoji3][emoji3][emoji3]Wazungu kabieni hapo hapo kwa juu mpaka manyonyo atoe mlio
Na ndo wanazidi kujiaribia, wanadhani kua hilo ni bunge la ndugai na TuliaIla hawa CCM ni watu wasiotaka kabisa kuukubali ukweli na ku-act, hizi propaganda na uongo hautawasaidia kwa chochote na wananchi wengi wanazidi kuwakataa kwa speed kubwa sana
Hii kwa kiswahili inaitwa "kutupiliwa mbali kwa maombi ya Tz kuzuia kujadiliwa na Bunge la Ulaya".Majibu
Responding to the Embassy of Tanzania’s Note Verbale dated 25 November 2025.
1. “The Government is concerned the EU did not give it an opportunity to present its side.”
Rebuttal:
A government that shuts down domestic media, censors all journalism about the October 29–Nov 3 killings, blocks observers, and arrests witnesses cannot claim it is being denied an opportunity to speak. The EU hearing exists precisely because Tanzania has refused to allow free reporting or independent investigations internally.
What the government calls “not given an opportunity” is actually:
•victims not being allowed to speak,
•civil society being threatened,
•opposition leaders being detained, and
•state machinery blocking truth-finding.
The EU cannot wait for a regime that is actively suppressing evidence.
2. “Proceeding without Tanzania’s views is inconsistent with the Cotonou Agreement and partnership dialogue.”
Rebuttal:
The Cotonou/OACPS–EU framework does not oblige the @EUinTZ to seek permission from a state before condemning killings or human rights violations. Dialogue is not a shield against accountability.
The government selectively quotes “dialogue” while ignoring:
•human rights clauses of the same agreement,
•obligations to prevent killings,
•obligations to protect political rights,
•the fact that dialogue does not supersede fundamental rights.
Th @EU_Commission is fully within its legal and moral mandate to deliberate on mass atrocities without waiting for perpetrators to dictate the schedule.
3. “Natural justice requires hearing both sides before conclusions are drawn.”
Rebuttal:
Natural justice begins at home. If Tanzania respected this principle:
•protesters would not have been shot,
•detainees would not be held incommunicado,
•@TunduALissu would not be isolated under CCTV surveillance,
•journalists would not be threatened,
•families of victims would not be denied information about their loved ones.
A government committing violations cannot invoke “natural justice” only when facing international scrutiny, while denying the same rights to its own citizens.
4. “The EU risks relying on unverified and one-sided narratives.”
Rebuttal:
This claim collapses instantly under scrutiny.
The evidence of abuses is:
•video-recorded,
•geo-verified,
•documented by hospitals treating gunshot victims,
•supported by eyewitnesses,
•corroborated by international organizations,
•acknowledged even by government insiders who have fled.
The only “unverified narrative” is the government’s shifting explanations, including:
•denying deaths,
•then admitting casualties,
•then blaming “outsiders”,
•then blaming “opposition incitement”,
•then claiming “no protests were authorized”.
None of these contradictions discredit the documented facts of killings.
5. “Tanzania has established a National Commission of Enquiry.”
Rebuttal:
The government is asking the world to trust a Commission that:
•has no publicly released terms of reference,
•is not independent of the Executive,
•excludes victims, opposition, civil society, and independent observers,
•lacks transparency,
•has historically been used to bury cases.
Calling this Commission “independent” is misleading. It is not credible by international standards (UN, AU, ACHPR) and cannot replace an impartial investigation.
6. “Tanzania remains committed to democracy, human rights, and the rule of law.”
Rebuttal:
Actions matter more than words.
No democratic government:
•shoots unarmed civilians,
•detains elected leaders for political reasons,
•blocks opposition rallies nationwide,
•manipulates the media through threats,
•invokes cybercrime laws to arrest group admins,
•shuts down the internet during political crises.
Commitment to human rights cannot coexist with extrajudicial killings and systematic repression.
This statement is diplomatic theatre, not reality.
😆😆😆, eti 'mama hana deni' kunakuwaga na vimisemo vya kipumbaf sana, sijui nani huwa anaviasisi!Jambo kubwa linakuja ukimya wa machawa na wanaojita wafia chama unanipa was was sisikii mitano tena mama hana den na nk jikon kunachemka sanaa sio bure
Sijakuelewa!Utajiri wote tunaenda kulamba miguu watu ,CCM ime laaniwa na vyombo vya dola vyote vinavyo walinda vina laana ,kama kuna viongozi wana options na idea za ku run nchi bila kulamba watu miguu kwa nini tuendelee kulinda hawa wapuuzi
Vyombo vya dola mna laaana