PostGE2025 Wasira: Kila siku Lissu anaweka mapingamizi, ndio maana inachukua muda mrefu
PostGE2025 Wasira: Kila siku Lissu anaweka mapingamizi, ndio maana inachukua muda mrefu
- Thread starter Waufukweni
- Start date
- Featured
Conversations and stories after Tanzania's 2025 General Elections
22 Julai 2026
Mahakama Kuu
Kivukoni Front
Dar es Salaam, Tanzania
BWANA JELA WA GEREZA LA UKONGA ANDREW NTAMAMIRO AFICHUA JINSI DOLA NA VYOMBO VYAKE UHUSIKA WAO KTK UCHELEWESHAJI WA KESI YA TUNDU LISSU
Part 3: TUNDU LISSU ALICHOMFANYA BWANA JELA HATAKUJA KUSAHAU MAISHA YAKE YOTE " HADI KATETEMEKA "
View: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=rR7l_nVwO3U
Sehemu ya tatu Leo mahakamani kesi iliyofunguliwa na mawakili wa Tundu Lissu dhidi ya mkuu wa magereza kuhusu kuzuiliwa mawakili pia mashahidi wa Tundu Lissu wa kesi ya uhaini kwenda gerezani Ukonga kuonana na mteja wao ambae ni Tundu Lissu na kukosa faragha wakati wa kuzungumza nae.
Tundu lissu kupitia maswali ya dodoso amemaliza kumuhoji maswali ya mkuu wa gereza la Ukonga la Dar es Salaam bwana jela ACP Andrew Ntamamiro alivyoshiriki kukwamisha kesi yake ya uhaini yenye adhabu ya kifo ikiwa Tundu Lissu atapatikana na hatia ya uhaini
Source : Uhuru Media Online
Isanga family
JF-Expert Member
- Feb 25, 2015
- 22,981
- 47,826
Umri umeenda mzee kipindi cha kusimamia ng'ombe kimefika sio binadamu..
Bulamba
JF-Expert Member
- Sep 17, 2011
- 14,275
- 13,575
Bora Dkt.Nchimbi mara 100 sio ww
Bulamba
JF-Expert Member
- Sep 17, 2011
- 14,275
- 13,575
Maoni ya Dkt. Wassira hayawakilishi matakwa ya walala hoi
Usomi wote wa mzee Stephen Wasira lakini amekubali kutumika
26 July 2026
The 3 ways stupidity spreads throughout a society | Jonny Thomson
View: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=uwyLGiyDa2g
Philosopher and Big Think columnist Jonny Thomson explores why evil is oddly easier to fight than stupidity, why Hitler's own architect claimed total ignorance at Nuremberg, and why arguing with a truly stupid person is, in one famous description, like playing chess with a pigeon
CHIEF PRIEST
JF-Expert Member
- Dec 13, 2021
- 21,737
- 42,892
Masikini huyu kiumbe hata hajui mwenendo wa kesi yenyewe muda wote yuko usingizini akiota anakula matunda mwitu yake kule Gombe
kina kirefu
JF-Expert Member
- Dec 14, 2018
- 18,577
- 23,171
Lisu alishamwita debe tupu
16 October 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA
(MAIN REGISTRY)
AT DODOMA
(CORAM: MRUMA, J., RUMISHA, J., AND LONGOPA, J.)
MISCELLANEOUS CIVIL CAUSE NO. 7300 OF 2026
BETWEEN
KULWA WILLIAM
MADUHU............................1ST PETITIONER
NASHON NKUNGU.......2ND PETITIONER
PAUL KISABO................3RD PETITIONER
VERSUS
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL................ 1ST RESPONDENT
THE COMMISSIONER GENERAL OF PRISONS...................... 2ND RESPONDENT
THE OFFICER IN CHARGE OF UKONGA PRISON .................. 3RD RESPONDENT
TUNDU ANTIPHAS MUGHWAI LISSU ................. 4TH RESPONDENT
TANGANYIKA LAW SOCIETY .................INTERESTED PARTY
JUDGEMENT
MRUMA, J.
This constitutional petition raises a question which is narrow in its
formulation but far-reaching in its consequences. The question is whether, when an advocate consults a client detained in prison, prison officers may
remain sufficiently close to hear the consultation, or whether the law requires security to be maintained by visual supervision without listening to conversations
Page 1
A related question concerns the circumstances in which prison
authorities may refuse an advocate access to a detained client. These questions may appear straightforward, but they raise matters of
considerable legal importance, particularly when considered in the light of the familiar principle that no one is above the law.
The Petitioners are advocates who say that they were instructed to
provide services in connection with criminal proceedings against the Fourth Respondent, Tundu Antiphas Mughwai Lissu. They contend that the arrangements at Ukonga Central Prison prevented confidential consultations,
interfered with their professional work, and impaired the effective enjoyment of the Fourth Respondent’s rights to a fair hearing and the privacy of his
communications. Their application is brought under Articles 26(2) and 30(3) of the Constitution of the United Republic of Tanzania, 1977; sections 4 and 5 of the Basic Rights and Duties Enforcement Act, commonly referred to as
BRADEA, Cap. 3, R.E. 2023; and rule 4 of the Basic Rights and Duties
Enforcement (Practice and Procedure) Rules.
The principal domestic provisions relied upon are regulation 13 of the
Prisons (Prison Management) Regulations, 1968, Government Notice No. 19 of 1968, and Articles 13(1), 13(3), 13(6)(a), 15, 16, 22(1), 26(1),
Page 2
READ MORE : FULL JUDGEMENT
Kulwa William Maduhu and Others vs Attorney General and Others (Miscellaneous Civil Cause No. 7300 of 2026) [2026] TZHC 6259 (16 October 2026)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF THE UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA
(MAIN REGISTRY)
AT DODOMA
(CORAM: MRUMA, J., RUMISHA, J., AND LONGOPA, J.)
MISCELLANEOUS CIVIL CAUSE NO. 7300 OF 2026
BETWEEN
KULWA WILLIAM
MADUHU............................1ST PETITIONER
NASHON NKUNGU.......2ND PETITIONER
PAUL KISABO................3RD PETITIONER
VERSUS
THE ATTORNEY GENERAL................ 1ST RESPONDENT
THE COMMISSIONER GENERAL OF PRISONS...................... 2ND RESPONDENT
THE OFFICER IN CHARGE OF UKONGA PRISON .................. 3RD RESPONDENT
TUNDU ANTIPHAS MUGHWAI LISSU ................. 4TH RESPONDENT
TANGANYIKA LAW SOCIETY .................INTERESTED PARTY
JUDGEMENT
MRUMA, J.
This constitutional petition raises a question which is narrow in its
formulation but far-reaching in its consequences. The question is whether, when an advocate consults a client detained in prison, prison officers may
remain sufficiently close to hear the consultation, or whether the law requires security to be maintained by visual supervision without listening to conversations
Page 1
A related question concerns the circumstances in which prison
authorities may refuse an advocate access to a detained client. These questions may appear straightforward, but they raise matters of
considerable legal importance, particularly when considered in the light of the familiar principle that no one is above the law.
The Petitioners are advocates who say that they were instructed to
provide services in connection with criminal proceedings against the Fourth Respondent, Tundu Antiphas Mughwai Lissu. They contend that the arrangements at Ukonga Central Prison prevented confidential consultations,
interfered with their professional work, and impaired the effective enjoyment of the Fourth Respondent’s rights to a fair hearing and the privacy of his
communications. Their application is brought under Articles 26(2) and 30(3) of the Constitution of the United Republic of Tanzania, 1977; sections 4 and 5 of the Basic Rights and Duties Enforcement Act, commonly referred to as
BRADEA, Cap. 3, R.E. 2023; and rule 4 of the Basic Rights and Duties
Enforcement (Practice and Procedure) Rules.
The principal domestic provisions relied upon are regulation 13 of the
Prisons (Prison Management) Regulations, 1968, Government Notice No. 19 of 1968, and Articles 13(1), 13(3), 13(6)(a), 15, 16, 22(1), 26(1),
Page 2
READ MORE : FULL JUDGEMENT