Tanzania Crisis: Legal Experts Point to Strong Evidence of Flawed Election as World Leaders Withhold Congratulations
While the AU, Burundi, and Somalia quickly extended congratulations to President Samia, key East African neighbors like Kenya, Uganda, and Rwanda have remained conspicuously silent, signaling diplomatic unease over the disputed polls.
Dar es Salaam, Tanzania – As President Samia Suluhu Hassan basks in the glow of a declared 97.66 percent electoral victory, legal experts and election analysts have raised serious questions about the mathematical and logistical impossibility of an election that claims 32.67 million votes were counted just under 48 hours amid nationwide internet blackouts, violent protests, and widespread voter suppression.
The National Electoral Commission (NEC) announced Saturday that President Samia secured 31,913,866 votes against her closest challenger’s 213,414, with an unprecedented 86 percent voter turnout. Yet these figures stand in stark contrast to observed reality that included the burning polling stations at midday, empty voting centers, and opposition claims of over 700 fatalities during security crackdowns on protesters.
Legal experts have joined the chorus of skepticism, with Nairobi lawyer Ahmednasir Abdullahi SC delivering a particularly damning assessment. “97 percent of votes cast, 31 million votes out of 37 million registered, and 270 MPs out of 272 – all these figures are prima facie evidence of a fundamentally flawed election,” he stated, capturing the essence of legal experts’ concerns across the region.
While he acknowledged that “CCM and President Samia remain a formidable political force in Tanzania and would likely have won decisively in any scenario,” Abdullahi’s analysis highlights the fundamental credibility gap plaguing the official results.
The claimed 86 percent turnout – 32.67 million of 37.7 million registered voters – represents the highest in Tanzanian history, achieved during what may be the country’s most violent election period since independence. Election analysts interpret these figures as evidence of what they describe as “a tightly managed process designed to project mass approval.”
“The record-breaking turnout,” argues political analyst Vincent Tanaka, “seems less a reflection of public enthusiasm than of a system determined to manufacture legitimacy at any cost.” Tanaka notes that while “CCM has historically been a dominant force in Tanzanian politics, the scale of this victory has sparked questions about the fairness and transparency of the electoral process due to restrictions on political freedoms, media censorship, and the government’s heavy-handed response to dissent.”
The statistical anomalies are particularly glaring when compared to previous elections. In 2005, turnout stood at 72 percent; in 2010, it dropped to 51 percentage; 2015 saw 67 percent participation; and the 2020 election recorded 51 percent turnout. The 2025 figure represents a dramatic 35-percentage point increase from the last election, achieved despite widespread protests and transportation disruptions.
Perhaps the most puzzling aspect revolves around the commission’s counting capabilities. The NEC claims to have tallied over 32 million votes within 48 hours despite a complete internet shutdown across Tanzania. This would require processing approximately 667,000 votes per hour – a logistical feat that election experts describe as “miraculous” under normal circumstances, let alone during nationwide unrest.
“How does a commission count millions of votes when there was a countrywide internet shut, down and down to dusk curfew, and with election staff fleeing protests, and with transportation disrupted?” asked an election-monitoring specialist Mbeka. “The mechanics alone raise serious questions about the result’s integrity.”
Social media users echoed these concerns. “Captain Mush” noted on their X handle, it took “48 hours to count more than 32 million votes across the country where there was internet shutdown and communication difficulties. Wow that’s a new record for their electoral commission in Tanzania.”
While the African Union Commission and leaders from Burundi and Somalia offered swift congratulations, the silence from key regional neighbors speaks volumes. Kenya’s William Ruto, Uganda’s Yoweri Museveni, and Rwanda’s Paul Kagame have notably refrained from sending congratulatory messages, suggesting diplomatic unease over the electoral process.
Burundi’s President Évariste Ndayishimiye and Somalia’s President Hassan Sheikh Mohamud are the first leaders to congratulate President Samia Suluhu Hassan on her re-election. Ndayishimiye wished her success and pledged continued Tanzania-Burundi cooperation, while Mohamud said her victory reflects Tanzanian confidence and expressed Somalia’s desire to strengthen regional ties and peace.
The United States, while not explicitly rejecting the results, has maintained a cautious stance, with its embassy issuing security alerts about ongoing unrest and blanket curfews rather than diplomatic congratulations. “The regional silence is deafening,” observes international relations expert Dr. Fatma Yusuf. “When neighboring leaders who typically prioritize stability over democracy hesitate to endorse an election outcome, it signals deep concerns about the process’s legitimacy.”
The African Union Commission’s statement drew criticism for trying to balance congratulations with concern. Chairperson Mahmoud Ali Youssouf commended Tanzanians for exercising their democratic rights, while expressing deep regret over post-election deaths and extending condolences to affected families. He reaffirmed the AU’s readiness to support Tanzania in preserving peace, national cohesion, and democracy, urging authorities to uphold fundamental freedoms, including peaceful assembly and expression, in line with national and international law.
This contradictory position sparked outrage across social media platforms. “African Union really out here sending condolences and congratulations in the same paragraph, like a eulogy signed by the murderer,” one social media user lamented. Another critic questioned: “Why is the African Union so quick to send congratulations at a time when lives were lost? Is the Union protecting Electoral Authoritarianism in Africa?”
Legal analysts argue the election’s flaws began long before voting day. The disqualification of main opposition leader Tundu Lissu of CHADEMA on treason charges and the exclusion of Luhaga Mpina of ACT-Wazalendo on technical grounds created what analysts describe as an uneven playing field from the outset.
Political analyst Tanaka highlighted the paradox: ‘While CCM and Suluhu would likely have won given their strong grassroots support and organization, the extraordinary margin of victory amid these circumstances has undeniably tarnished the election’s legitimacy in the eyes of many Tanzanians and the international community.
Governance expert Dr. Mumo Muinde reinforced this view: “Why would a party that can easily win an election oppress opponents like that? You don’t begin oppression and torture of opposition candidates if you’re assured that the majority of voters back you.”
Behind the statistical debates, reports of more fatalities and crackdown have been reported in parts of Dar es Salaam on Sunday. CHADEMA claims approximately 700 fatalities, while diplomatic sources confirm at least 500 deaths to international media. The UN human rights office has documented “credible reports” of numerous killings, though the true toll remains unknown due to communication restrictions.
The government’s response – extending curfews in Dar es Salaam, Mwanza, and Arusha, while conducting door-to-door searches and mass arrests – signals a focus on suppressing dissent rather than addressing electoral grievances. Receiving her election victory certificate, President-elect Samia described the protests as ‘unpatriotic,’ stating: ‘We shall deploy security forces to ensure peace prevails across the country. What we witnessed was very unpatriotic, as infrastructure built with public taxes was vandalized.’”
Internet services remain blocked nationwide five days since Election Day on Wednesday, disrupting communication and electronic payments. International airports are operational, but flights are patchy, and travelers are urged to confirm departures and prepare for checkpoints. The embassy has advised citizens to avoid protest-prone areas, keep a low profile, stay alert, and follow local media for updates. Officials have not specified when the restrictions will end.
As Tanzania moves forward, the AU’s statements, along with select congratulatory messages and condemnations, underscore the continent’s and the international community’s stake in stable governance. With inauguration ceremonies looming, attention is focused on how President Samia will navigate the divisions exposed by this election and foster unity in one of East Africa’s most populous nations, with over 70 million people.
Under the shadow of these contested results, the international community faces a stark dilemma. The tension between respecting national sovereignty and upholding democratic standards is at its peak, with Tanzania’s election emerging as a cautionary case of how statistical impossibility can become political reality.
Critics are asking: will the world accept an outcome that defies both observable evidence and basic arithmetic, or will Tanzania’s purported “landslide” victory be remembered as the moment African democracy bowed to engineered numbers?
I thought in Tanzania the announcement by the electoral management body is FINAL so those strong evidence of flawed elections will remain an academic exercise!
No George. You need to recognize that there’s legality and there legitimacy. Suluhu could be legally announced winner but her victory is hallow and she lacks legitimacy in the eyes of many Tanzanians and its neighbors. This article just echoes the reason why she is illegitimate.
@Mose I don’t know how legitimacy is acquired but I thought through constitutional means which include participating in an electoral process and being declared the winner. Whether her win was fair or not I don’t believe denies it or constitute legitimacy. I believe lawyers in the house can educate us.
@George Legality in elections refers to strict adherence to the written law—the constitution, statutes, and electoral codes. An election is legal if it follows the prescribed procedural rules, from voter registration to the announcement of results. Legitimacy, however, resides in the perception and acceptance of the election by the public and key stakeholders. An election is legitimate if it is widely believed to be fair, free, and reflective of the people’s will. Crucially, an election can be legal yet lack legitimacy; a process might technically follow the law but be so marred by corruption, intimidation, or a lack of genuine competition that it is seen as a sham. Conversely, an election might have minor legal irregularities but still be considered legitimate due to an overall transparent and credible process. Ultimately, legality is about the letter of the law, while legitimacy is about political credibility and public trust.