 |
| Tundu Lissu with family and friends visiting him at Aga Khan Hospital in Kenya, 2017. Photo: Courtesy |
By Adonis Byemelwa
In recent months, the chilling realities of political violence and surveillance in Tanzania have emerged starkly, echoing a disturbing global trend where the safety of political figures is jeopardized. Tundu Lissu, Deputy Chairman of the Chadema party, has openly voiced his fears for his safety, alleging a complex web of government surveillance and intimidation that culminated in a near-fatal assassination attempt on his life.
Lissu's plight is not merely a personal battle; it reflects a broader systemic issue of political repression in Tanzania, raising serious questions about the state’s commitment to upholding human rights and privacy. Lissu's ordeal began on August 18, 2017, when he reported being tailed by a suspicious vehicle—a Toyota Premio, with the registration number T 460 CQV. Just days later, on August 22, he accused Tigo Tanzania, a leading telecommunications company, of leaking his private phone records to a government intelligence agency.
This alarming breach of privacy set the stage for a harrowing escalation of events. Two weeks after these revelations, Lissu was shot over 16 times during a parliamentary session while contributing to a bill, an incident that occurred amid a tense atmosphere where President John Magufuli had proposed severe penalties for individuals he labeled as traitors.
The implications of Lissu’s statements are profound. He claims that a Tigo Tanzania network security officer named Michael Clifford showed undue interest in online discussions involving high-profile figures just days after the shooting.
Lissu, relentless in his pursuit of justice, has vowed to hold those he believes responsible accountable. He asserts, “When we file a lawsuit, we will demand that Paul Makonda be charged criminally in international courts. This is not the first time I have mentioned Makonda in connection with my assassination attempts. I do not mention him lightly; I have substantial evidence.” Lissu has hinted at a substantial network of support, citing Makonda's alleged barred entry into the United States as evidence of his claims' seriousness.
With a commitment to seeking justice, Lissu is coordinating with his attorney, Bob Amsterdam, to file a lawsuit against both Millicom (Tigo) and the Tanzanian government in international courts. “We decided to take this matter to international courts because Rostam Aziz claimed judges could be influenced through phone calls to distort justice. Therefore, we will seek justice in a venue where the government cannot interfere with the judges,” Lissu explained. He aims to claim significant damages for the harm he has endured, hinting at a substantial sum yet to be determined.
This unfolding saga of Lissu's attempts at accountability raises urgent questions about the safety of political figures in Tanzania and the potential misuse of governmental power. It brings to light a critical issue—the apparent normalization of violence and intimidation against dissenting voices within the country.
In stark contrast, the legal and judicial systems in the United States actively pursue justice against those who threaten the democratic process. A recent case involving Ryan Routh, accused of plotting to assassinate Donald Trump, underlines this commitment.
Routh was indicted on charges of attempted assassination after he was apprehended for pointing a rifle through a fence at Trump’s golf club. Federal prosecutors have emphasized that such violence aimed at political candidates will not be tolerated.
The comparison between these two scenarios is striking. While Routh faces serious legal repercussions and is detained pending trial, Lissu’s situation illustrates the struggles faced by political opponents in Tanzania who are often left vulnerable to violence and intimidation without adequate protection from the law. Lissu’s allegations of government surveillance, coupled with his near-fatal shooting, paint a picture of a political environment where dissent is met with lethal force rather than legal recourse.
The concept of privacy is also central to this discussion. In Tanzania, the right to privacy has been recognized since the introduction of the Bill of Rights in the Constitution of the United Republic of Tanzania in 1984. However, the reality of this right is increasingly being undermined by state actions.
Article 16 of the Constitution calls for laws to protect privacy rights, but the lack of comprehensive legislation in the realm of privacy and data protection has left significant gaps. The Cybercrimes Act outlines provisions for the disclosure of data during criminal investigations but fails to ensure robust protection for individual rights against government overreach.
The absence of clear regulations regarding data ownership and the transfer of personal information exacerbates the potential for abuse. Lissu's allegations against Tigo Tanzania highlight the risks individuals face when private data is mishandled or weaponized against them by state actors.
The enforcement of laws under the Cybercrimes Act appears inconsistent, with significant disparities in penalties for similar offenses. For instance, under this act, the interception of private communication carries a different penalty than outlined in the Investigation Regulations of 2017, showcasing a fragmented legal framework.
The recent arrest of the directors of JamiiForums, an online platform known for discussions on a variety of topics including politics, highlights the tensions surrounding freedom of expression in Tanzania.
Charged with obstructing investigations for failing to comply with a police order to disclose information, these arrests signify a broader crackdown on dissent and anonymity in political discourse.
As Tundu Lissu’s case unfolds, it serves as a stark reminder of the precarious nature of political engagement in Tanzania. His determination to pursue justice through international courts highlights a growing frustration with the inability of domestic mechanisms to provide a fair hearing. It raises critical questions about the role of international bodies in ensuring accountability for human rights violations and political violence.
In stark contrast to Tanzania’s internal challenges, the U.S. legal system remains vigilant against threats to democracy, as evidenced by the swift actions taken against individuals like Ryan Routh. The dichotomy between these two nations illustrates a broader struggle for the protection of human rights and the rule of law, wherein one country grapples with the specter of political violence and intimidation while the other actively enforces legal standards to safeguard democratic processes.
As the international community closely monitors the developments surrounding Lissu's allegations and legal battles, the voices of those advocating for justice and accountability must be amplified. The chilling realities faced by political figures in Tanzania, coupled with the apparent disregard for privacy and safety, necessitate urgent action and oversight. Lissu’s fight for justice transcends his ordeal; it embodies the struggle for the fundamental rights and freedoms of all Tanzanians.
In this increasingly globalized world, the actions taken—or not taken—by governments in response to political violence and surveillance will resonate far beyond their borders. The contrast between Lissu’s attempts to seek justice in a potentially hostile environment and the swift legal responses seen in the United States accentuates the urgent need for reforms in Tanzania’s political and legal landscapes. The future of democracy and human rights in Tanzania hangs in the balance, awaiting a decisive response from both domestic authorities and the international community.