Dar es Salaam. The treason case facing Chadema national chairperson Tundu Lissu resumes today, Monday, October 20, 2025, at the High Court’s Dar es Salaam sub-registry after a weekend recess.
In today’s proceedings, the prosecution is expected to respond to objections raised by Mr Lissu over the admissibility of a video alleged to contain statements of a treasonous nature, which the prosecution seeks to tender as evidence.
Mr Lissu is charged with treason for allegedly uttering words intended to threaten the Government of the United Republic of Tanzania, contrary to section 39(2)(d) of the Penal Code.
It is alleged that on April 3, 2025, in Dar es Salaam, while being a Tanzanian citizen loyal to the Union, he made statements threatening the Government and posted them on social media, saying in part:
“If they say this stance signals rebellion, it’s true…, because we are saying we’ll stop the election, we’ll mobilise for rebellion—that’s how change comes…, so we’ll disrupt it…, this election, we’ll mess it up completely…, we’ll cause serious chaos...”
The case is being heard by a panel of three judges, led by Iringa High Court Resident Judge, Justice Dunstan Ndunguru, sitting with Justices James Karayemaha and Ferdinand Kiwonde. The matter is currently at the stage of the prosecution’s evidence through its third witness.
The third prosecution witness, Police Inspector Samweli Eribariki Kaaya, 39, a video expert from the forensic imaging unit at Police Headquarters in Dar es Salaam, told the court that his department deals with recording and analysing still and motion images related to criminal incidents and suspects.
He said that after conducting a two-stage forensic examination, both physical and scientific, he concluded that the video was authentic.
Led by Senior State Attorney Tawab Issa, Inspector Kaaya said he received and examined Mr Lissu’s video, which was submitted on April 8, 2025, by the Office of the Regional Crime Officer in Dar es Salaam. The video was provided in two forms: a flash drive and a memory card.
Following his analysis, he confirmed the preliminary findings that the video was genuine and prepared a forensic report, which, together with related exhibits, he handed over to the requesting authority.
The prosecution subsequently asked the court to admit the video as evidence. However, Mr Lissu objected, advancing four reasons.
First, he argued that although the video was listed among the prosecution’s exhibits, it was never presented before the Committal Court at Kisutu Resident Magistrate’s Court during committal proceedings, contrary to section 263(2) of the Criminal Procedure Act (CPA), Revised Edition 2023.
He further cited Court of Appeal precedents, insisting that all exhibits must be read or shown during committal proceedings.
Second, he claimed the video was introduced prematurely, arguing it should only have been tendered after the forensic report had been formally received, contrary to sections 216 to 220 of the CPA.
Third, he challenged the witness’s authority to tender the video, saying he was not duly appointed by the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) and had not been gazetted, as required by law.
He noted that his appointment came from the then-Attorney General, who lacked the legal mandate to make such designations, and that he was an image specialist, not a certified forensic scientist.
Lastly, Mr Lissu contended that the prosecution had failed to establish a proper chain of custody from the time the video was obtained to its submission in court.
After hearing Mr Lissu’s objections, the court adjourned the case to today, when the prosecution is expected to respond before Mr Lissu is given a chance to reply. The court will then deliver its ruling on the admissibility of the video evidence
Register to begin your journey to our premium contentSubscribe for full access to premium content
