The prosecution in Tanzania has told the High Court that a conviction for treason does not necessarily carry a mandatory death sentence. In the treason case against Chadema chairman Tundu Lissu, the prosecution argued that the law gives the court discretion to impose an alternative penalty. Lissu is charged with treason for allegedly inciting the public to prevent the 2025 General Election by making and publishing statements online.
The case, being heard by judges Dunstan Ndunguru, James Karayemaha, and Ferdinand Kiwonde, is now at the final-submissions stage. The prosecution presented its final submissions, arguing that the evidence had established the offence and addressing the possible penalty if Lissu is convicted. Principal State Attorney Nassoro Katuga said the defence had consistently argued that the only punishment available for the offence was death by hanging.
However, Katuga argued that Section 39(2)(d) of the Penal Code uses the phrase "shall be liable to," which gives the court discretion when determining the appropriate sentence. He said the punishment for this offence ranges from zero to hanging, and the court has discretion to determine the punishment for the accused if he is convicted. The court must consider whether Lissu owed allegiance to the United Republic of Tanzania, formed an intention to incite the public to threaten the government, and demonstrated that intention through his actions.
The prosecution said there was no dispute that Lissu owed allegiance to Tanzania, as he had acknowledged during the preliminary proceedings that he was a Tanzanian citizen. Katuga also rejected Lissu's argument that the prosecution had omitted parts of his statements from the charge sheet in a way that distorted their meaning. He cited Section 135 of the Criminal Procedure Act, which requires a charge to contain a statement that conveys the essential information necessary for the accused to understand the allegation.
Katuga said it would be impractical to reproduce every word spoken by an accused person in a charge sheet. He then examined the charge sheet and the legal elements of the alleged offence, arguing that the prosecution had established the ingredients of treason involving an attempt to threaten the government. The prosecution must prove the charge beyond the required threshold, and Katuga said the evidence given by 17 witnesses had proved the charge.
Lissu presented his final submissions over four days, arguing that the prosecution had failed to prove the charge. He is charged with treason for allegedly making and publishing statements online calling on the public to put pressure on the country's leadership. The prosecution's submissions were presented in response to Lissu's arguments, and the court will now consider the evidence and submissions before making a decision.
The court's decision will depend on the evidence presented and the submissions made by both the prosecution and the defence. Three key points were raised in the prosecution's submissions: the court has discretion to determine the sentence if Lissu is convicted, the prosecution has established the ingredients of treason, and the evidence given by 17 witnesses has proved the charge.
Key points
- The prosecution argues that a conviction for treason does not necessarily carry a mandatory death sentence.
- The court has discretion to determine the sentence if Lissu is convicted.
- The prosecution has established the ingredients of treason involving an attempt to threaten the government.
