Lissu objects to lawyer visit violations, invisible witness

By Grace Gurisha , The Guardian
Published at 09:52 AM Feb 10 2026
OPPOSITION leader Tundu Lissu.
Photo: File
OPPOSITION leader Tundu Lissu.

OPPOSITION leader Tundu Lissu, upon resumed hearing of treason charges at the High Court in Dar es Salaam yesterday, has failed procedure where his lawyers converse with him at the office of the prison chief security officer at Ukonga in Dar es Salaam.

Addressing a panel of three judges at the city subordinate registry of the High Court led by Judge Dunstan Ndunguru, along with Judges James Karayemaha and Ferdinand Kiwonde, the self-representing treason suspect said he was ready to proceed with his trial but wanted to raise urgent procedural issues first.

“I will speak because you, judges, are responsible for ensuring that prisons are run legally for both convicts and remand prisoners,” he told the court.

He cited Regulation 13 of the Prisons Rules (GN 60 of 1967), which allows detainees to consult their lawyers privately, underlining that prison officials are not allowed to listen to conversations between the suspect and his lawyers. 

“A major problem has arisen regarding my right to speak with my lawyers privately,” he stated, resurfacing the pertinent issue as his case resumed after it was adjourned on 12 November, in tandem with other issues concerning prison visits.

Citing Regulation 12, he said prisoners have the right to be visited by relatives, friends and others—not only lawyers. “Prisons are public institutions and should not discriminate against visitors based on political affiliation,” he said, telling the panel that all such visits had been banned since 12 November, affecting colleagues in his political party as well as relatives.

He said the third issue concerns delays in the trial, as the case has been heard on only 14 of 307 days of his detention, with 88 days in court appearances going by without any hearings. “I am in prison and nothing is progressing,” he said, objecting to conducting cases in sessions as unsuitable for serious offences such as treason.

If one of the three judges falls ill, a split decision could force the case to restart, potentially extending proceedings until 2030, the self-representing advocate intoned, similarly questioning the need for three judges.

Delving into a similar trial in earlier decades, he said that Judge Nassoro Mnzavas managed 140 witnesses alone, urging the judges to uphold the law and respect prisoners’ rights. “No one is above the law,” he said.

Following Lissu’s arguments, principal state attorney Nassoro Katuga rejected claims that witness number 11 could not be seen due to being protected by the court.

“The witness is only visible to the judges, and the court is satisfied with the enclosure. Whether you can or cannot see the witness does not prove anything,” he stated, questioning procedures used by the self-defending accused to verify the witness’s visibility and that the evidence did not comply with due process.

The state attorney said that witness protection is governed by the 2025 Witness Protection Regulations, allowing measures such as enclosures to safeguard witnesses, dismissing claims that cross-examination under such conditions was unfair.

“Only the witness’s voice is required for testimony,” he declared, insisting that all of the accused’s claims “are legally unfounded and intended to delay the trial,” while the accused maintained his position on six points, requesting that the witness not testify from the enclosure, claiming it would deny a fair hearing.

After hearing arguments from both sides, the judges adjourned the case until tomorrow for a ruling on the witness, similarly cautioning courtroom observers to keep their mobile phones silent.

“You will recall that yesterday there were repeated disturbances from mobile phones. Please be careful. If we fail to manage ourselves, the court will take action,” the leading panellist asserted.

The hearing resumed yesterday with Lissu tabling a legal complaint concerning breaches of his rights while in detention. He objected to senior remand prison officer eavesdropping on his conversations with lawyers since the case was adjourned last November 12 as violating the Prisons Act regulations on visitations and meeting with lawyers.