6 MARCH 2026

A DECISION OF THE AFRICAN COURT ON HUMAN AND PEOPLES’ RIGHTS

Arusha, 6 March 2026: The African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights (the Court) today delivered a Judgment in the case of Ado Shaibu and Others v. United Republic of Tanzania.

Mr Ado Shaibu, Mr Ezekiah Dibogo Wenje, Mr Omar Musa Makame, Ms Dorah Seronga Wangwe, Mr Enock Weges Suguta and Mr Kassim Ali Haji (hereinafter referred to as (“Applicants”) are nationals of the United Republic of Tanzania and members of the political party - Alliance for Change and Transparency. They filed their Application against the United Republic of Tanzania (“The Respondent State”) claiming violations of their civil and political rights, preceding, during and immediately after the 2020 general elections in the Respondent State.

In accordance with Article 3 of the Protocol to the African Charter on Human and People’s Rights on the Establishment of An African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights (“The Protocol”), the Court first determined whether it had jurisdiction to hear the Application. In this regard, the Respondent State objected to the material jurisdiction of the Court, stating that the Court’s jurisdiction is limited and therefore it cannot determine issues that fall purely under the jurisdiction of its national courts. In its decision, the Court dismissed the objection and found that even though its jurisdiction is limited by the Protocol, it is empowered to determine applications which raise alleged violations of rights guaranteed by the Charter, the Protocol or any other human rights instruments ratified by the Respondent State. Therefore, since the Applicants’ alleged violations of human rights protected by the Charter and other human rights instruments, the Court’s material jurisdiction was satisfied.

Although the other aspects of the Court’s jurisdiction were not contested by the Respondent State, the Court examined them as required by its Rules. In this regard, the Court found that it had personal jurisdiction since, on 29 March 2010, the Respondent State deposited the Declaration provided for under Article 34(6) of the Protocol. This Declaration allows individuals to file applications against the Respondent State in accordance with Article 5(3) of the Protocol. The Court underscored that the Respondent State’s withdrawal of the said Declaration on 21 November 2019 did not affect this Application, as the Application was filed before the Court on 20 November 2020, while the withdrawal took effect on 22 November 2020.

With regard to temporal jurisdiction, the Court found that most of the alleged violations occurred in 2020, that is, after the Respondent State had ratified the Protocol. Moreover, the alleged violation as regards article 41(7) of the Respondent State’s Constitution of 1977 on the inability to challenge the result of presidential elections, is continuing as it still remains in the Constitution to date, and therefore, the Court’s temporal jurisdiction was satisfied. Lastly, the Court held that it had territorial jurisdiction as the alleged violations occurred in the Respondent State’s territory which is a party to the Charter and the Protocol. The Court then held that it had jurisdiction to hear the case.

The Court then considered, in accordance with Article 56 of the Charter and Rule 50(2) of the Rules of Court (hereinafter referred to as “the Rules”), whether the Application was admissible. In this regard, the Respondent State raised three objections to the admissibility of the Application. First, the Respondent State argued that the Application was based exclusively on news disseminated by the mass media, and therefore did not comply with Rule 50(2)(d) of the Rules. In its decision, the Court found that the Application was based on some media reports but also on other documents such as affidavits. Therefore, the Court dismissed the objection and found that the Application complied with the provision of Rule 50(2)(d) of the Rules.

Second, the Respondent State argued that the Applicants filed their case before the Court, prematurely as they had not exhausted local remedies. The Court in its decision found that the Applicants had not exhausted local remedies as they had only made unsubstantiated general statements on there being a climate of fear in the country which impeded them from exhausting local remedies. Nevertheless, the Court found that the allegation relating to the lack of remedies to challenge the result of presidential elections was admissible as there was no remedy to challenge result of presidential elections in the national courts of the Respondent State.

Lastly, the Respondent State contended that the allegation relating to the lack of remedies to challenge the result of presidential elections was inadmissible because it had already been settled by the Court in its decision on the matter of Jebra Kambole v Tanzania. In its decision, the Court held that for a matter to be settled there must be a convergence of three conditions: the identity of the parties; (ii) the identity of the applications or their supplementary, consecutive or alternative nature or whether the case flows from a request made in the initial case and (iii) the existence of a first decision on the merits. In this regard, the Court found that the identity of the parties was not the same as the Kambole case had been filed by an individual in the public’s interest while the present case had been filed by individuals allegedly affected by the conduct of the elections. Therefore, the Court found that the alleged violation herein had not been settled.

With regard to the allegation on the lack of remedy to challenge the result of presidential elections in the national courts of the Respondent State which the Court found to be admissible, the Court had to ensure that the other conditions of admissibility had been fulfilled before determining its merit. In this regard, the Court found that the Applicants had clearly been identified by names, Applicants’ claims sought to protect their rights guaranteed under the Charter and the language used in the Application was not disparaging or insulting to the Respondent State in fulfilment of Rule 50(2)(a), (b) and (c) respectively.

With regards to the condition on filing the Application within a reasonable time, the Court noted that the time to be considered was the time between the deposit of the Declaration, which is, 29 March 2010 and the date of the filing of the Application, 20 November 2020, a period of 10 years, six months and 22 days. In its finding, the Court observed that since the alleged violation is continuing as the impugned provision remains in the Constitution of the Respondent State, the time limit for seizing the Court had not begun to run. Therefore, the Application complied with Rule 50(2)(f) of the Rules. The Court also found that the allegation on the right to challenge the presidential elections does not concern a subject matter which has already been settled according to the Charter, the Constitutive Act of the AU or the UN Charter in accordance with Rule 50(2)(g) of the Rules.

On the merits of the case, the Applicants alleged that there was no remedy to challenge presidential elections after the announcement of the winner by the Electoral Commission and that this violated their right to a fair trial under Article 7(1) of the Charter and the obligation of Member States to put up measures that would give effect to the Charter under Article 1 thereof. In its decision, the Court found in accordance with its previous jurisprudence that article 41(7) of the Respondent State’s Constitution, in so far as it bars courts from inquiring into the election of a presidential candidate who has been declared elected by the Electoral Commission, violates Article 1 and 7(1) of the Charter.

The Court having found the violation of Articles 1 and 7(1) of the Charter, ordered the Respondent State to take all necessary constitutional and legislative measures, within one year, to ensure that article 41(7) of its Constitution is amended and aligned with the provisions of the Charter.

Each Party was ordered to bear its own costs.

 A joint Separate Opinion of Justice Tchikaya and Justice Anukam is appended to the judgment in accordance with Article 28(7) of the Protocol and Rule 70(3) of the Rules in which they argued that the Court should have separated the consideration of the alleged violation of rights involving physical violence and the rights allegedly violated by the electoral laws.

Further Information

Further information about this case, including the full text of the decision of the African Court, may be found on the website at: https://www.african-court.org/cpmt/details-case/046/2020

For any other queries, please contact the Registry by email registrar@african-court.org.

The African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights is a continental court established by African Union Member States to ensure the protection of human and peoples’ rights in Africa. The Court has jurisdiction over all cases and disputes submitted to it concerning the interpretation and application of the African Charter on Human and Peoples' Rights and any other relevant human rights instrument ratified by the States concerned. For further information, please consult our website at www.african-court.org.

MAOMBI NA. 046/2020

HUKUMU KUHUSU UZINGATIAJI WA SHERIA NA FIDIA

6 MACHI 2026

UAMUZI WA MAHAKAMA YA AFRIKA YA HAKI ZA BINADAMU NA WATU 

Arusha, tarehe 6 Machi 2026: Mahakama ya Afrika ya Haki za Binadamu na Watu (Mahakama) leo imetoa Hukumu katika kesi ya Ado Shaibu na Wengine dhidi ya Jamhuri ya Muungano wa Tanzania. 

Bw Ado Shaibu, Bw Ezekiah Dibogo Wenje, Bw Omar Musa Makame, Bi Dorah Seronga Wangwe, Bw Enock Wegesa Suguta na Bw Kassim Ali Haji (hapa wanarejelewa kama ("Waleta Maombi") ni raia wa Jamhuri ya Muungano wa Tanzania na wanachama wa chama cha siasa cha Alliance for Change and Transparency (ACT Wazalendo). Waliwasilisha Maombi yao dhidi ya Jamhuri ya Muungano wa Tanzania ("Mjibu Maombi") wakidai ukiukwaji wa haki zao za kiraia na kisiasa, kabla, wakati na baada ya uchaguzi mkuu wa mwaka 2020 katika nchi ya Mjibu Maombi.

Kwa mujibu wa Kifungu cha 3 cha Itifaki ya Mkataba wa Afrika wa Haki za Binadamu na Watu kuhusu Kuanzishwa kwa Mahakama ya Afrika ya Haki za Binadamu na Watu (“Itifaki”), kwanza Mahakama iliangalia endapo ilikuwa na mamlaka ya kusikiliza Maombi hayo. Katika suala hili, Mjibu Maombi alipinga mamlaka halisi ya Mahakama, akisema kwamba mamlaka ya Mahakama yana kikomo na kwa hivyo haiwezi kuamua masuala ambayo yako chini ya mamlaka ya mahakama zake za kitaifa. Mahakama katika uamuzi wake ilitupilia mbali pingamizi hilo na kubaini kwamba ingawa mamlaka yake ya kisheria yanawekewe mipaka na Itifaki, ina uwezo wa kuamua maombi ambayo yanaibua madai ya ukiukaji wa haki zilizohakikishwa na Mkataba, Itifaki au hati zingine zozote za haki za binadamu zilizoidhinishwa na Mjibu Maombi. Kwa hivyo, kwa kuwa Waleta Maombi wametoa madai kuhsu ukiukaji wa haki za binadamu zinazolindwa na Mkataba na hati zingine za haki za binadamu, mamlaka halisi ya Mahakama yalitimizwa.

Ingawa vipengele vingine vya mamlaka ya Mahakama havikupingwa na Mjibu Maombi, Mahakama ilivichunguza kwa mujibu wa Kanuni zake. Katika suala hili, Mahakama ilibaini kuwa ilikuwa na mamlaka binafsi kwani, tarehe 29 Machi 2010, Mjibu Maombi iliweka Azimio kwa mujibu wa Kifungu cha 34(6) cha Itifaki. Azimio hili linaruhusu watu binafsi kuwasilisha maombi dhidi ya Mjibu Maombi kulingana na Kifungu cha 5(3) cha Itifaki. Mahakama ilisisitiza kwamba Mjibu Maombi kuondoa Azimio hilo mnamo tarehe 21 Novemba 2019 hakukuathiri Maombi haya, kwani Maombi haya yaliwasilishwa mbele ya Mahakama hii mnamo tarehe 20 Novemba 2020, wakati uondoaji wa Azimio ulianza kutekelezwa mnamo tarehe 22 Novemba 2020. 

Kuhusiana na mamlaka ya muda, Mahakama ilibaini kuwa ukiukaji mwingi unaodaiwa kufanywa ulitokea mnamo mwaka 2020, yaani, baada ya Mjibu Maombi kuridhia Itifaki. Aidha, madai ya ukiukaji kuhusu kifungu cha 41(7) cha Katiba ya Mjibu Maombi ya mwaka 1977 kuhusu kutoweza kupinga matokeo ya uchaguzi wa rais, yanaendelea kwa kuwa kifungu hicho bado kipo kwenye Katiba hadi sasa, na kwa hivyo, mamlaka ya muda ya Mahakama yalitimizwa. Mwisho, Mahakama iliona kwamba ilikuwa na mamlaka ya kieneo kwa kuwa ukiukaji unaodaiwa kufanywa ulitokea katika eneo la Mjibu Maombi ambaye ni mhusika wa Mkataba na Itifaki. Kwa hivyo Mahakama iliona kwamba ilikuwa na mamlaka ya kusikiliza kesi hiyo.

 

Kisha Mahakama, kwa mujibu wa Kifungu cha 56 cha Mkataba na Kanuni ya 50(2) ya Kanuni za Mahakama (hapa inarejelewa kama “Kanuni”), iliangalia endapo Maombi haya yalikubalika. Katika suala hili, Mjibu Maombi aliibua mapingamizi matatu kuhusu ukubalifu wa Maombi haya. Kwanza, Mjibu Maombi alisema kuwa Maombi haya yalitokana tu na habari zinazosambazwa na vyombo vya habari, na kwa hivyo hayakuzingatia Kanuni ya 50(2)(d) ya Kanuni za Mahakama. Katika uamuzi wake, Mahakama ilibaini kuwa Maombi hayo yalitokana na baadhi ya ripoti za vyombo vya habari lakini pia yalitokana nyaraka nyingine kama vile hati za kiapo. Kwa hivyo, Mahakama ilitupilia mbali pingamizi hilo na kuona kwamba Maombi haya yalizingatia Kanuni ya 50(2)(d) ya Kanuni za Mahakama.

Pili, Mjibu Maombi alisema kwamba Waleta Maombi waliwasilisha kesi yao mbele ya Mahakama, kabla ya wakati kwani walikuwa hawajakamilisha taratibu za ndani. Mahakama katika uamuzi wake ilibaini kwamba Waleta Maombi walikuwa hawajakamilisha taratibu za ndani kwani walikuwa wametoa tu taarifa za jumla zisizo na uthibitisho kuhusu kuwepo na hali ya hofu nchini ambayo iliwazuia kukamilisha taratibu za ndani. Hata hivyo, Mahakama ilibaini kwamba madai yanayohusiana na kukosekana kwa njia ya kupinga matokeo ya uchaguzi wa urais yalikubalika kwani hakukuwa na njia ya kupinga matokeo ya uchaguzi wa urais katika mahakama za kitaifa za Mjibu Maombi.

Mwisho, Mjibu Maombi alipinga kwamba madai yanayohusiana na kukosekana kwa njia ya kupinga matokeo ya uchaguzi wa urais hayakubaliki kwa sababu tayari yalikuwa yameamuliwa na Mahakama katika uamuzi wake kwenye kesi ya Jebra Kambole dhidi ya Tanzania. Katika uamuzi wake, Mahakama iliona kwamba ili kesi iamuliwe lazima kuwe na muunganiko wa masharti matatu: (i) utambulisho wa wahusika; (ii) utambulisho wa maombi au hali yake kuwa ya ziada, ya mfululizo au mbadala au endapo kesi hiyo inatokana na ombi lililotolewa katika kesi ya awali na (iii) kuwepo kwa uamuzi wa kwanza kuhusu uzingatiaji wa sheria. Katika suala hili, Mahakama ilibaini kuwa utambulisho wa wahusika haukuwa sawa kwani kesi ya Kambole iliwasilishwa na mtu binafsi kwa maslahi ya umma wakati kesi ya sasa iliwasilishwa na watu wanaodaiwa kuathiriwa na jinsi uchaguzi ulivyoendeshwa. Kwa hivyo, Mahakama ilibaini kuwa ukiukaji unaodaiwa hapa haukuwa umetolewa uamuzi.

Kuhusiana na madai ya kukosekana kwa njia ya kupinga matokeo ya uchaguzi wa urais katika mahakama za kitaifa za Mjibu Maombi ambayo Mahakama iliona kuwa yanakubalika, Mahakama ililazimika kuhakikisha kwamba masharti mengine ya ukubalifu yametimizwa kabla ya kuamua uzingatiaji wake wa sheria. Katika suala hili, Mahakama ilibaini kwamba Waleta Maombi walikuwa wametambuliwa wazi kwa majina, madai ya Waleta Maombi yalitaka kulinda haki zao zilizohakikishwa chini ya Mkataba na lugha iliyotumika katika Maombi haya haikuwa ya dharau au ya matusi kwa Mjibu Maombi katika kutimiza matakwa ya Kanuni ya 50(2)(a), (b) na (c) mtawaliwa. 

Kuhusiana na sharti la kuwasilisha Maombi ndani ya wakati unaofaa, Mahakama ilibainisha kuwa wakati unaopaswa kuzingatiwa ulikuwa muda kati ya kuweka Azimio, yaani, tarehe 29 Machi 2010 na tarehe ya kuwasilisha Maombi, tarehe 20 Novemba 2020, kipindi cha miaka 10, miezi sita na siku 22. Katika uamuzi wake, Mahakama ilibaini kuwa kwa kuwa ukiukaji huo unaendelea kwa sababu kfungu kinachopingwa bado kipoa katika Katiba ya Mjibu Maombi, kikomo cha muda wa kuwasilisha Maombi katika Mahakama hii kilikuwa hakijaanza. Kwa hivyo, Maombi haya yalizingatia Kanuni ya 50(2)(f) ya Kanuni za Mahakama. Mahakama pia ilibaini kuwa madai ya haki ya kupinga uchaguzi wa rais hayahusu suala ambalo tayari limetatuliwa kwa mujibu wa Mkataba, Sheria ya Katiba ya Umoja wa Afrika au Mkataba wa Umoja wa Mataifa kwa mujibu wa Kanuni ya 50(2)(g) ya Kanuni za Mahakama.

Kuhusu uzingatiaji wa sheria wa kesi hiyo, Waleta Maombi walidai kwamba hakukuwa na njia ya kupinga uchaguzi wa rais baada ya Tume ya Uchaguzi kutangaza mshindi na kwamba hali hii ilikiuka haki yao ya kusikilizwa kwa haki kwa mujibu wa Kifungu cha 7(1) cha Mkataba na wajibu wa Nchi Wanachama kuweka hatua ambazo zingezingatia Mkataba chini ya Kifungu chake cha 1. Mahakama katika uamuzi wake, kwa mujibu wa uamuzi wake awali, ilibaini kwamba kifungu cha 41(7) cha Katiba ya Mjibu Maombi, kwa kadiri inavyozuia mahakama kuhoji kuhusu ushindi wa mgombea wa urasi ambaye ametangazwa Tume ya Uchaguzi, kinakiuka Kifungu cha 1 na 7(1) cha Mkataba.

Baada ya Mahakama kubaini ukiukaji wa Kifungu cha 1 na 7(1) cha Mkataba, iliamuru Mjibu Maombi kuchukua hatua zote muhimu za kikatiba na kisheria, ndani ya mwaka mmoja, ili kuhakikisha kwamba kifungu cha 41(7) cha Katiba yake kinarekebishwa na kuzingatia masharti ya Mkataba.

Kila upande uliamriwa kubeba gharama zake. 

Maoni ya Pamoja ya Jaji Tchikaya na Jaji Anukam yameambatishwa kwenye hukumu hii kwa mujibu wa Kifungu cha 28(7) cha Itifaki na Kanuni ya 70(3) ya Kanuni ambazo walidai kwamba Mahakama ilipaswa kutenganisha kushughulikia ukiukaji wa haki unaodaiwa kufanywa unaohusisha ukatili wa kimwili na haki zinazodaiwa kukiukwa na sheria za uchaguzi.

Maelezo zaidi

Maelezo zaidi kuhusu kesi hii, ikiwa ni pamoja na hati kamili ya uamuzi wa Mahakama ya Afrika, yanaweza kupatikana kwenye tovuti kupitia: https://www.african-court.org/cpmt/details-case/046/2020 

Kwa maswali mengine yoyote, tafadhali wasiliana na Msajili kwa barua pepe registrar@african-court.org.

Mahakama ya Afrika ya Haki za Binadamu na Watu ni mahakama ya bara zima iliyoanzishwa na nchi wanachama wa Umoja wa Afrika ili kuhakikisha haki za binadamu na watu barani Afrika zinalindwa. Mamlaka ya Kisheria ya Mahakama kuhusu kesi na mizozo yote iliyowasilishwa kwake kuhusu tafsiri na utekelezaji wa Mkataba wa Afrika wa Haki za Binadamu na Watu na chombo kingine chochote cha Haki za Binadamu kilichoidhinishwa na Nchi zinazohusika. Kwa maelezo zaidi, tafadhali tembelea tovuti yetu www.african-court.org. 

 

📌Miaka ya adha yafikia kikomo, usafirishaji wa mazao na huduma za kijamii sasa warahisishwa

Ngorongoro 

Wananchi wa Kata ya Oldonyosambu, wilayani Ngorongoro, wameishukuru Serikali kwa kuwajengea daraja la mawe lenye urefu wa mita 45 katika Mto Mbaga linalounganisha vijiji vya Jema na Oldonyosambu.

Wakizungumza kwa nyakati tofauti wananchi hao walisema kukamilika kwa daraja hilo kumewaondolea changamoto ya muda mrefu ya usafirishaji wa mazao na upatikanaji wa huduma za kijamii hususan katika kipindi cha masika.

Diwani wa Kata ya Oldonyosambu, Mhe. Kabaney Mojah, amesema kabla ya ujenzi wa daraja hilo, wakazi wa eneo hilo walikumbwa na matatizo makubwa ya mawasiliano na usafirishaji wa mazao kutoka Kijiji cha Jema ambako kuna shughuli za kilimo.

“Kijiji cha Jema ni eneo letu kuu la uzalishaji mazao. Hapo awali tulikuwa na changamoto kubwa ya kusafirisha mazao kwenda soko la Arusha pamoja na mawasiliano kati ya vijiji hivi viwili. Tunaishukuru Serikali kwa kutatua tatizo hili,” alisema Mhe. Mojah.

Aliongeza kuwa Mto Mbaga ulikuwa kikwazo kikubwa, hasa nyakati za mvua, hali iliyosababisha usumbufu hata katika masuala ya dharura.

“Mto Mbaga ni mto korofi, zamani wakati wa masika wananchi hawakuweza kuvuka kabisa. Sasa tunaweza hata kuwasafirisha wanafunzi wanaougua kutoka Shule ya Sekondari Jema hadi Hospitali ya Wilaya iliyopo Wasso bila hofu,” amesisitiza.

Naye,  mkazi wa eneo hilo  Likam Maroseck amesema  kabla ya daraja kujengwa, baadhi ya wananchi walikumbwa na hatari ya kusombwa na maji walipokuwa wakivuka kwenda kulima mashamba yao kijijini Jema.

“Ujenzi wa daraja hili umeleta ahueni kubwa. Kwa sasa shughuli zetu zinafanyika kwa urahisi na usalama zaidi,” amesema.

Kwa upande wake, Kaimu Meneja wa TARURA Wilaya ya Ngorongoro, Mhandisi Edwin Merdad, amesema kuwa katika mwaka wa fedha 2023/2024, walitenga bajeti ya shilingi milioni 500 kwa ajili ya ujenzi wa daraja hilo pamoja na uboreshaji wa barabara inayounganisha vijiji hivyo.

Amesema pamoja na mpango wa awali wa kuchonga na kuweka kifusi kwenye barabara yenye urefu wa kilomita tano, wamefanikiwa kujenga barabara yenye urefu wa kilomita 14 kati ya vijiji hivyo viwili.

“Daraja hili ni msaada mkubwa si tu kwa wakazi wa Oldonyosambu na Jema, bali pia kwa wafanyabiashara kutoka nchi jirani ya Kenya wanaoshiriki katika shughuli za minada. 

“Zamani wakati wa masika wananchi walishindwa kuvuka kwa takribani miezi miwili, lakini sasa hali hiyo imekuwa historia,” amesema Mhandisi Merdad.

Halmashauri ya Wilaya ya Ngorongoro ina mtandao wa barabara wenye jumla ya kilomita 970.698, zikiwemo barabara za zege kilomita 0.224, barabara za changarawe kilomita 306.41 na barabara za udongo kilomita 664.064.

 

Kikao cha Makatibu Wakuu na Maafisa Waandamizi wa Nchi Wanachama wa Jumuiya ya Maendeleo Kusini mwa Afrika (SADC) kupitia utekelezaji wa Mpango Mkakati Elekezi wa Maendeleo ya Kikanda (Regional Indicative Strategic Development Plan- RISDP) kimeanza leo tarehe 04 Machi 2026 jijini Pretoria, Afrika Kusini.

Ujumbe wa Tanzania katika kikao hicho cha utangulizi kuelekea Mkutano wa Baraza la Mawaziri wa SADC utakaofanyika Machi 12 na 13, 2026, unaongozwa na Naibu Katibu Mkuu wa Wizara ya Mambo ya Nje na Ushirikiano wa Afrika Mashariki, Balozi Said Shaib Mussa. 

Wakati wa hotuba za ufunguzi,  Mwenyekiti wa kikao hicho ambaye ni Naibu Katibu Mkuu wa Wizara ya Uhusiano wa Kimataifa na Ushirikiano ya Afrika Kusini, Balozi Tebogo Seokolo na Katibu Mtendaji wa SADC, Mhe. Elias Magosi walisisitiza umuhimu wa  mpango wa RISDP wa mwaka 2020 - 2030 kufanyiwa tathmini kwa lengo la kujiridhisha ufanisi wake na kubaini changamoto ili ziweze kupatiwa ufumbuzi kwa muktadha wa kuboresha utekelezaji wa mpango huo kwa kipindi cha miaka mitano iliyosalia 2026-2030.

Changamoto mbalimbali zimebainishwa katika utekelezaji wa mpango wa RISDP ambazo ni pamoja na uhaba wa rasilimali fedha; utofauti baina ya vipaumbele vya kitaifa na kikanda na kutorandana kwa sera zilizotungwa na utekelezaji halisi wa mpango wa RISDP.

Balozi Seokolo alieleza kuwa utekelezaji wa RISDP  ulipitia na unapitia changamoto nyingi kama vile madhara ya UVIKO-19, mabadiliko ya tabianchi, changamoto za kiusalama, uhaba wa nishati, usalama wa chakula na mabadiliko ya siasa za ulimwengu. Alibainisha kuwa, katika kukabiliana na changamoto hizo, SADC inahitaji mikakati thabiti na utekelezaji wa pamoja ili nchi wanachama ziweze kufikia malengo ya RISDP.

 

Katika kuadhimisha Siku ya Wanawake Duniani tarehe 8 Machi 2026, tunamsherehekea PCOI Lohiza Zakaria, mwanamke shupavu na mtaalamu wa uhifadhi wa wanyamapori, ambaye ameonesha ujasiri wa kipekee katika kazi yake ya kuhifadhi wanyamapori na mazingira ya hifadhi ya Ngorongoro kwa zaidi ya miaka 34.

Zakaria, ambaye mara nyingi anajulikana kwa jina la utani "Profesa," ni mtaalamu aliyejikita katika tafiti za wanyamapori, sensa za viumbe hai, na kupambana na mimea vamizi katika hifadhi ya Ngorongoro. Katika kazi yake, Zakaria ameweza kugundua na kutatua changamoto nyingi zinazokabili hifadhi hii maarufu duniani, huku akiwa na umakini mkubwa katika kuzingatia usalama na ustawi wa wanyama pori.

Tukio la Hatari: Uso kwa Uso na Faru

Moja ya matukio muhimu zaidi katika maisha ya kazi ya Zakaria ni tukio la tarehe 6 Machi 2020. Alikumbana na tukio la hatari lililomkumba akiwa katika utekelezaji wa majukumu yake kwenye Kreta ya Ngorongoro. Ghafla, alikumbana na faru ambaye alionekana bila kutarajia na kumkimbiza kwa kasi. Zakaria alijaribu kutumia mbinu alizozipata wakati wa mafunzo ya kijeshi ili kujinasua, lakini alishambuliwa na kujeruhiwa vibaya.

Hata hivyo, ujasiri wake ulizidi changamoto hiyo. Aliweza kuokolewa na kisha alikimbizwa hospitali kwa matibabu ya dharura. Baada ya kupona, Zakaria alirejea kazini bila kuogopa hatari, akiendelea na kazi yake ya uhifadhi kwa moyo wa kujitolea.

Mchango wa Zakaria katika Uhifadhi wa Wanyamapori

Zakaria ni mfano wa wanawake shupavu katika sekta ya uhifadhi. Ameendelea kufanya kazi akiwa na jukumu la kuhimiza jamii kutunza wanyamapori na mazingira kwa ujumla. Aliwahi kusema, “Uhifadhi si kazi ya leo, ni kazi ya maisha. Tunapohifadhi wanyamapori, tunahakikisha kuwa dunia yetu inakuwa salama kwa vizazi vijavyo.”

Zakaria amehusika katika shughuli mbalimbali za uhifadhi, ikiwa ni pamoja na kutatua changamoto zinazotokana na mabadiliko ya tabianchi, kupambana na uvamizi wa mimea vamizi, na kuhakikisha usalama wa wanyama pori katika maeneo ya Ngorongoro. Uzoefu wake katika kazi hii umemfundisha kuwa kila hatua katika uhifadhi ni muhimu, na kila changamoto inahitaji ubunifu na juhudi za pamoja.

Miaka 6 Tangu Tukio la Faru: Pongezi kwa Ujasiri na Uongozi Wake

Kwa sasa, Zakaria anasherehekea miaka 6 tangu tukio la kukutana uso kwa uso na faru, tukio ambalo lilimfundisha mengi kuhusu ujasiri, kujitolea, na kujenga tabia ya kupambana na changamoto zinazojitokeza. Katika maadhimisho haya, tunamvisha pete ya heshima na kumpongeza kwa kujitolea kwake na juhudi za kipekee katika uhifadhi wa wanyamapori.

Zakaria ni mfano wa kweli wa jinsi wanawake wanavyoweza kuwa viongozi wa kubadili dunia. Uzoefu wake, ujasiri wake, na mchango wake katika uhifadhi wa mazingira ya Ngorongoro unadhihirisha kuwa wanawake wana nafasi muhimu katika uongozi na utunzaji wa rasilimali za asili.

Zakaria: Mwanamke Jasiri na Mchango Wake wa Kipekee

Zakaria anathibitisha kuwa wanawake wana nguvu na uwezo wa kuleta mabadiliko katika sekta yoyote. Anajivunia kuwa sehemu ya jamii inayotunza mazingira ya Ngorongoro, na kwa kweli, mchango wake katika uhifadhi wa wanyamapori na mazingira ni wa kipekee na hauwezi kupuuziliwa mbali.

Kwa kumpongeza Zakaria, tunatoa mfano wa nguvu ya wanawake katika utunzaji wa mazingira na wanyamapori, na kwa kutambua mchango wake, tunathibitisha kuwa wanawake wanachangia sana katika kuboresha jamii na mazingira.

Zakaria, wewe ni mfano wa matumaini na nguvu kwa wanawake wote duniani. Pongezi nyingi kwa ujasiri wako na kujitolea kwako kwa ajili ya uhifadhi wa mazingira yetu.

#SikuYaWanawake2026 #WanawakeShupavu #Uhifadhi #Ngorongoro #UongoziWaWanawake #Ujasiri

 

 

Spinel ni miongoni mwa madini ya vito yenye thamani kubwa sana duniani, yanayoendelea kupata umaarufu mkubwa katika masoko ya kimataifa kutokana na ubora wake wa kipekee, rangi adimu na uimara wa hali ya juu. Tanzania ni miongoni mwa nchi chache duniani zilizojaaliwa rasilimali hii adimu, hususan katika eneo la Mahenge, Kijiji cha Epanko, Wilaya ya Ulanga, mkoani Morogoro, eneo ambalo limejijengea sifa ya kuwa chanzo cha spinel bora zaidi duniani.

Spinel ni jiwe la vito lenye rangi mbalimbali ikiwemo nyekundu, pinki, zambarau, bluu na machungwa. Umaarufu wake unatokana na sifa kadhaa muhimu ikiwemo uwazi wake wa hali ya juu (high clarity), rangi kali na ya kuvutia inayopendwa sana katika soko la vito, pamoja na uimara mkubwa unaoufanya kudumu kwa muda mrefu. Aidha, spinel nyingi hupatikana bila kuhitaji matibabu ya joto (heat treatment), jambo linaloongeza thamani yake sokoni.

Kwa miaka mingi, spinel nyekundu ilichanganywa na ruby hadi pale sayansi ya madini ilipobaini tofauti zake. Leo hii, spinel imesimama kama jiwe la vito lenye hadhi yake binafsi na thamani inayozidi kuongezeka mwaka hadi mwaka.

Mahenge, iliyopo Wilaya ya Ulanga mkoani Morogoro, ni eneo lenye umuhimu mkubwa katika ramani ya madini ya vito duniani. Spinel inayopatikana Mahenge inajulikana kwa rangi yake ya pinki na nyekundu yenye mwanga wa kipekee (neon-like glow), sifa inayofanya spinel ya Mahenge kutafutwa sana na wafanyabiashara wa vito duniani.

Ugunduzi wa spinel katika eneo hili umeifanya Mahenge kutambulika kimataifa na kuiweka Tanzania miongoni mwa nchi muhimu katika biashara ya madini ya vito. Spinel ya Mahenge imekuwa ikitajwa mara kwa mara katika maonesho makubwa ya vito ya kimataifa ikiwemo Tucson Gem Show nchini Marekani, Hong Kong Jewellery Fair, pamoja na maonesho ya vito ya Bangkok, Thailand, hatua inayoongeza hadhi ya Tanzania katika soko la kimataifa la madini ya vito.

Uchimbaji wa spinel Mahenge unaongozwa na kampuni za Kitanzania, zikiwemo Ruby International Limited na Franone Mining, ambazo ndizo wawekezaji wakuu katika uchimbaji wa madini haya katika eneo hilo. Kampuni hizi, ambazo ni mali ya Watanzania, zimeonesha mfano mzuri wa jinsi wawekezaji wa ndani wanavyoweza kuendeleza rasilimali za taifa kwa ufanisi, uwajibikaji na uzingatiaji wa Sheria.

Akizungumza kuhusu umuhimu wa spinel ya Mahenge na mchango wake kwa jamii, Msimamizi wa Ruby International Mining, Mhandisi Penina Mtego, katika mgodi wa Epanko, Mahenge, anasema:

“Spinel ya Mahenge ni rasilimali adimu yenye ubora wa kipekee duniani. Kama kampuni ya Kitanzania, tumedhamiria kuhakikisha uchimbaji wake unazingatia viwango vya kitaalamu huku manufaa yake yakirudi moja kwa moja kwa taifa na kwa wananchi wa Mahenge. Kipaumbele chetu ni kutoa ajira, kuchangia maendeleo ya jamii na kulinda mazingira.”

Msimamo wa Serikali

Serikali ya Tanzania inaendelea kusisitiza umuhimu wa kusimamia rasilimali za madini kwa tija na uwazi ili ziwe chachu ya maendeleo ya wananchi. Akizungumzia mchango wa madini ya vito, hususan spinel ya Mahenge, Naibu Waziri wa Madini, Dkt. Steven Kiruswa, anasema:

“Madini ya vito kama spinel ya Mahenge ni utajiri mkubwa wa taifa letu. Serikali inaendelea kuweka mazingira rafiki kwa wawekezaji wazawa ili kuhakikisha rasilimali hizi zinachimbwa kwa kuzingatia Sheria, zinawanufaisha wananchi, na kuongeza mapato ya serikali kwa maendeleo ya nchi.”

Kauli hiyo inaakisi dhamira ya serikali ya kuimarisha ushiriki wa Watanzania katika sekta ya madini na kuongeza thamani ya rasilimali kabla ya kuingia kwenye masoko ya kimataifa.

Uwepo wa migodi ya spinel Mahenge unaleta mabadiliko makubwa ya kijamii na kiuchumi kwa wakazi wa eneo hilo. Vijana wengi pamoja na kina mama wamepata ajira za moja kwa moja na zisizo za moja kwa moja katika shughuli za uchimbaji, ulinzi, usafirishaji na huduma mbalimbali.

Dkt. Kiruswa anasisitiza kuwa, ajira hizi zimekuwa chanzo muhimu cha kipato kwa familia nyingi, hivyo kusaidia kupunguza umaskini na kuboresha hali ya maisha ya wakazi wa Mahenge na maeneo ya jirani.

Mbali na kutoa ajira, Dkt. Kiruswa anazipongeza Kampuni za Ruby International Limited na Franone Mining kuwa kuendelea kutekeleza wajibu wao kwa kijamii kwa kuchangia maendeleo ya jamii inayozunguka migodi yao ambapo mchango huo unajumuisha: Ujenzi wa zahanati, ujenzi na ukarabati wa shule na madarasa, ujenzi wa ofisi za serikali za mitaa, kuboresha miundombinu ya barabara, kuchangia ustawi wa vijana na wanawake na ushirikiana kwa karibu na viongozi wa eneo katika utekelezaji wa miradi ya maendeleo ya Mahenge.

Hatua hizi zinaonesha dhamira ya dhati ya kampuni hizi katika kuhakikisha rasilimali za madini zinaleta manufaa ya moja kwa moja kwa wananchi.

*Utalii wa Madini na Fursa Mpya za Kiuchumi*

Uwepo wa madini ya spinel Mahenge umechochea pia kukua kwa utalii wa madini, ambapo wadau wa ndani na nje ya nchi wanafika Mahenge kujifunza, kuona na kushuhudia shughuli za uchimbaji wa madini ya vito.

Utalii wa madini Mahenge umeanza kuchangia kukua kwa uchumi wa eneo hilo kwa kuleta fursa mpya katika sekta za malazi, usafiri, uuzaji wa vito pamoja na kukuza utamaduni wa wenyeji.

Spinel ni hazina kubwa ya taifa ambayo imeipa Tanzania heshima na nafasi ya kipekee katika soko la madini ya vito duniani. Mahenge, Wilaya ya Ulanga mkoani Morogoro, imekuwa mfano bora wa namna rasilimali asili zinavyoweza kuleta maendeleo endapo zitasimamiwa kwa uwazi, uzalendo na uwajibikaji.

Kupitia uwekezaji wa kampuni za Kitanzania kama Ruby International Limited na Franone Mining, spinel imekuwa chanzo cha ajira, mapato na maendeleo ya kijamii, kuthibitisha kuwa uwekezaji wa wazawa katika rasilimali za taifa ni nguzo muhimu ya maendeleo endelevu ya nchi.

Kutokana na ubora wa madini hayo, rasilimali hii bado inahitaji uwekezaji wa kutafiti, kuchimba, biashara  na kuongezwa thamani fursa hizi bado zipo na ikizingatiwa kwa mujibu wa wataalam kwa vito ni aina 25 tu vinazochimbwa Tanzania huku kukiwa na zaidi ya aina 100 za  madini ya vito ambayo nchi hii imebarikiwa kuwa nazo. Kwa wageni Sheria inaruhusu kuingia mkataba wa usaidizi kupitia teknolojia na mitaji.

 

The three major international human rights courts—the African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights (AfCHPR), the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACtHR)—have convened for the Fourth International Human Rights Forum, which began today, March 3, 2026, in Arusha, Tanzania. The forum aims to strengthen cooperation among the courts, facilitate the exchange of experiences, and address common human rights issues impacting their respective regions.

This event is taking place within the framework of the African Court's 80th Ordinary Session, running from March 2 to 27, 2026, at the Court’s headquarters in Arusha. Over the course of the two-day forum, judges and experts from the three courts will engage in discussions on a range of important human rights issues, including the impact of emerging technologies, climate change, and the ongoing threats to fundamental human rights and the rule of law.

Judge Blaise Tchikaya – President of the African Court on Human and Peoples' Rights (AfCHPR) opened the forum with a warm welcome to all participants, emphasizing the African Court’s 20th anniversary as a significant milestone. 

He highlighted the Court’s ongoing commitment to defending human rights across Africa and its efforts to address the challenges posed by political conflicts and geopolitical issues.

"We celebrate our achievements, but we are also keenly aware of the continuing challenges in protecting human rights, especially in light of current conflicts and political instability," Judge Tchikaya remarked. 

He also mentioned the upcoming relocation of the African Court’s headquarters to Lakilaki area , aimed at improving its operations and visibility.

Judge Arnfinn Bardsen – Vice President of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR), congratulated the African Court on its 20th anniversary and expressed his support for the Forum’s objectives. 

He underscored the importance of collaboration between international human rights courts, particularly as the world faces rising authoritarianism and a decline in democratic values. 

"We are witnessing a global trend of diminishing faith in democracy and growing authoritarianism. 

As human rights courts, it is our shared responsibility to ensure that human rights continue to be upheld," said Judge Guyomar.

Judge Nancy López President of Inter-American Court of Human Rights (IACtHR), stressed the importance of regular meetings among international human rights courts to address the emerging challenges of the digital age, climate change, and the protection of individual freedoms. 

"Technology and digital surveillance are increasingly encroaching on privacy and freedom of expression. It is crucial that we work together to develop a unified legal approach to safeguard these rights in a rapidly changing world," she noted.

The Fourth International Human Rights Forum is focusing on critical contemporary issues, including the role of emerging technologies such as artificial intelligence (AI) in shaping human rights and governance. Judges and experts will explore both the opportunities and the associated risks that new technologies present to privacy, freedom of expression, and human rights protection.

Additionally, the three courts will renew their Memorandum of Understanding (MoU), which was initially signed in 2023, further solidifying their collaboration in advancing human rights worldwide.

The Fourth International Human Rights Forum serves as a vital platform for dialogue and cooperation among the three major international human rights courts. It reinforces their shared commitment to addressing the challenges of safeguarding human rights and the rule of law in a world marked by political, technological, and environmental changes.

Arusha, Tanzania — March 2, 2026. The President of the Republic of Ghana, John Dramani Mahama, today officially launched the 2026 Judicial Year of the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights, marking the institution’s 20th anniversary with a strong call for African nations to deepen their commitment to human rights and judicial independence.

Speaking during the ceremony held in Arusha, Mahama urged African Union member states that have not yet ratified the Court’s Protocol to do so without delay. He also encouraged governments to respect and implement the Court’s judgments in good faith and to allow individuals and non-governmental organizations direct access to the Court.

The Ghanaian leader reflected on his personal history, recounting how his father was detained and later forced into exile for his political views. He said the experience shaped his enduring belief in the protection of human rights and the rule of law.

“I stand before you not only as a Head of State, but as the child of a man who was detained for serving his country and advising its leader,” Mahama said. “No one stands alone when injustice occurs. Its impact extends to families, communities, and entire nations.”

He emphasized that although Africa is made up of 55 sovereign states, their destinies are interconnected and require a strong continental institution capable of safeguarding shared values. Over the past two decades, he noted, the Court has demonstrated courage and fortitude in defending the principles enshrined in the African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights.

Mahama also referenced prominent African figures who suffered persecution or assassination during liberation struggles, including Patrice Lumumba, Thomas Sankara, and Nelson Mandela, saying Africa lost invaluable human potential during those turbulent decades.

Quoting Tanzania’s founding President, Julius Nyerere, who once said, “One does not judge one’s state of health by comparing it to a sick person,” Mahama called on African nations to define their own standards of justice, democracy, and governance.

With Africa’s population projected to reach 2.5 billion by 2050, he said the continent holds immense demographic power that must be matched by strong institutions that protect dignity, liberty, and self-determination.

“Now is the time for Africa to step into its greatness,” he declared.

On behalf of the citizens of Africa, President Mahama officially declared the 2026 Judicial Year of the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights open, reaffirming the continent’s collective responsibility to uphold justice and human dignity.

Arusha, Tanzania The United Republic of Tanzania has reiterated its firm commitment to strengthening the African human rights system as the African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights (AfCHPR) officially opened its 2026 Judicial Year during a solemn ceremony held in Arusha.

The Deputy Minister for Constitutional and Legal Affairs, Zainab Athumani Katimba, described Tanzania’s role as Host State as “a profound privilege” and reaffirmed the Government’s enduring support for the Court’s mandate.

The ceremony was graced by the President of Ghana, John Dramani Mahama, who attended as Guest of Honour, alongside the President of the Court, Honourable Judge Blaise Tchikaya, Vice President Lady Justice Bensaoula Chafika, representatives of African Union institutions, members of the diplomatic corps, civil society organisations, and members of the press.

Conveying “warm and fraternal greetings” from President Samia Suluhu Hassan, Katimba welcomed delegates from across the continent, noting that their presence reflected the high esteem in which the Court is held and the shared commitment to advancing justice in Africa.

“The African Court on Human and Peoples’ Rights has a noble mandate: to ensure the protection of human and peoples’ rights across our Continent,” Katimba stated, congratulating the Court on its twentieth anniversary.

She observed that over the past two decades, the Court has demonstrated “dedication, resilience, and unwavering commitment,” ensuring meaningful access to justice at regional and international levels. She further noted that the institution has contributed significantly to the vision of “African Solutions to African Problems” by strengthening an adjudicatory system that bridges diverse legal traditions and advances justice across Member States.

Acknowledging existing challenges — including hesitancy by some States to accede to the Court’s jurisdiction, withdrawals of declarations under Article 34(6) of the Protocol, and non-implementation of certain judgments — Katimba emphasized that the Court has nonetheless “remained steadfast in its resolve and consistent in its jurisprudential development,” navigating complex legal and political landscapes with “prudence, integrity, and professionalism.”

“The strength of the African Court ultimately reflects our collective commitment to the rule of law, accountability, and human dignity,” she said.

Katimba highlighted Tanzania’s longstanding engagement with the Court since its establishment in 2006, describing the relationship as one characterised by sustained cooperation and mutual respect. She pointed to domestic legal reforms influenced by the Court’s jurisprudence, including developments following *Alex Thomas v. Tanzania* that contributed to the enactment of the Legal Aid Act, as well as judicial reasoning referenced in *Attorney General v. Dickson Paulo Sanga* drawing from *Anaclet Paulo v. Tanzania*.

She further affirmed that Tanzania remains engaged in “constructive dialogue with the Court on matters relating to access under Article 34(6) of the Protocol,” describing the dialogue as part of efforts to strengthen mutual confidence, institutional effectiveness, and the broader aspiration for justice and accountability across the continent.

Under the theme, *“20 Years of Service in Protecting Human and Peoples’ Rights in Africa,”* Katimba described the anniversary as a timely opportunity to reflect on the Court’s journey, celebrate its milestones, and draw lessons to guide its future direction.

“As this Court marks this important milestone, may the coming decades further consolidate its noble mandate as a steadfast guardian of human and peoples’ rights and as an enduring beacon of Africa’s justice, dignity, and moral authority,” she concluded.

The ceremony formally marked the commencement of the 2026 Judicial Year of the AfCHPR, reinforcing Africa’s collective resolve to uphold justice, constitutionalism, and the protection of human rights across the continent.

Arusha, Tanzania — March 2, 2026. The East African Community (EAC) Heads of State are set to convene for the 25th Ordinary Summit on March 7, 2026, in Arusha, United Republic of Tanzania, reaffirming their commitment to deepening regional integration and improving the livelihoods of East African citizens.

Held under the theme, “Deepening Integration for Improved Livelihoods of EAC Citizens,” the Summit — the highest decision-making organ of the Community — will bring together leaders from the eight EAC Partner States to deliberate on strategic issues shaping the future of the regional bloc.

Key agenda items include reviewing progress in the implementation of regional programmes, considering institutional reports, and advancing strategic initiatives aimed at accelerating integration and promoting sustainable socioeconomic development.

Among the highlights of the Summit will be the launch of the EAC Customs Bond, a single regional customs guarantee designed to replace the current requirement for multiple national bonds along transit routes. Under the new framework, traders and clearing agents will secure one bond recognized across all Partner States, significantly reducing compliance costs and border delays.

The Customs Bond links customs administrations, insurers, and financial institutions within a unified regional system. The initiative is expected to safeguard government revenue, facilitate faster movement of goods, and enhance trade efficiency across the Community.

The Heads of State will also officially launch the 7th EAC Development Strategy (2026/27–2030/31), which outlines the Community’s strategic direction for the next five years. The Strategy builds on lessons from the previous development cycle and aligns with EAC Vision 2050, the African Union’s Agenda 2063, and the Sustainable Development Goals.

Speaking ahead of the Summit, EAC Secretary General Veronica Nduva emphasized the importance of the meeting as a platform for collective leadership and decisive regional action.

“The Summit of the EAC Heads of State remains the most important platform for guiding the Community’s integration agenda. Convening in Arusha provides an opportunity for our leaders to take strategic decisions that strengthen cooperation, promote trade, and advance shared prosperity for the people of East Africa,” she said.

She added that the launch of the Customs Bond and the 7th Development Strategy reflects the Community’s shift toward practical solutions that enhance competitiveness and economic resilience.

The Summit will also consider the Report of the Council to the Heads of State covering the period from November 30, 2024, to December 31, 2025, as well as modalities for implementing the directive of the 24th Summit on sustainable financing of the EAC budget based on a 65 percent equal contribution and 35 percent assessed contribution formula.

Other key decisions expected include the appointment of a new EAC Secretary General, the appointment of Judges to the East African Court of Justice, renewal of Deputy Secretaries General, appointment of Commissioners to the EAC Competition Authority, and assent to Bills passed by the East African Legislative Assembly.

The Summit follows an extraordinary meeting of the EAC Council of Ministers taking place from March 2 to 5, 2026, at the EAC Headquarters in Arusha.

The outcomes of the 25th Ordinary Summit are expected to reinforce policy alignment among Partner States and accelerate implementation of key regional programmes aimed at fostering inclusive growth and deeper economic integration across East Africa.