High Court Advocate, Edson Kilatu, has a huge axe to grind against High Court Judge, Hon. Mwanga, whom he accuses of condemning him unheard. Advocate Kilatu isn’t amused when the High Court Judge orders his arrest following his client, Chadema Board of Trustees member Koomu, accused him of forging court documents. Ms. Koomu accused the learned lawyer of making her part of the withdrawal of the case against Chadema against her will!Edson Kilatu
The learned lawyer has many beefs to munch and chew: first he claims that his former client was the one who initiated the case withdrawal proceedings and not himself. That he travelled to her home, and was able to pinpoint unverifiable key features of her home and location: meandering dilapidated roads, quaking furniture, a home in bad of repaint etc etc all not amounting to evidence since such information doesn’t address the key issues in the matter in dispute.
Anybody not connected to the matter may still recollect everything the embattled lawyer has applied to shield himself from the serious allegations of advocate-client rights and privileges. The lawyer said he has signed the affidavit behind withdrawal of interest by his client which goes to the root of the matter: An advocate representing a client has a conflict of interest to exert his powers of attorney.
This is where the whole saga gets even more interesting. Why cell leaders including video evidence were not gathered to ensure it isn’t an advocate who has to defend himself, as the case is right now. He ought to have been surrounded by an army of evidential materials particularly of a matter of law of this stature laden with political duress.
Advocate Kilatu may be speaking the gospel truth but the evidence he had been citing was unhelpful to advance his case. However, he has one “killer punch”: “the right to be heard.” Accordingto him, the learned judge ordered his arrest after hearing only from his accuser. He was deprived of his constitutional right to be heard before the learned judge condemned him to face arrest without his rights being fully observed.
At the heart of the dispute is a purported affidavit signed by his client, Ms. Koomu, concerning her withdrawal from the case of distribution of assets and money between Chadema mainland and Zanzibar. Ms. Koomu is inevitable of the plaintiffs who are accusing Chadema mainland of shortchanging Zanzibar where they come from.
Advocate Kilatu has said he is yet to see the copy of his arrest orders despite scouring the judiciary website something he finds unusual given how much the judiciary has invested to fast-track uploading Court decisions in their website.
Out of this unusual litigation close to elections, court orders have banned indefinitely Chadema from operations paralyzing it to conduct party functions weaponizing the police to interfere with their operations on the guises of “High Court Order” indefinitely banning Chadema from doing anything until the matter is resolved judicially.
Chadema has accused the judiciary of deference to the executive. Chadema reads executive interference to paralyze its “No Reform, No Election.” that has caught the imagination of younger, unemployed voters. CCM feels threatened and this is why Chadema is facing a scattergun from all directions.
Advocate-client relationships are extremely sensitive matters that may lead to deregistration of an advocate if offence of gross misconduct have been proven. This case laced with high octane politics appears superficially fabricated but advocate lack of care may have compounded the matter is now confronting.
What are the real issues?
The case involved Advocate Edson Kilatu and High Court Judge Hon. Mwanga unfolds against a backdrop of intense political pressure, judicial misconduct allegations, and violations of due process. Below is a structured analysis of the key issues, drawing on parallel cases and legal principles evident in the search results:
⚖️ 1. Arrest of Advocate Kilatu Without Due Process.
– Condemnation Unheard:
Kilatu asserts that Judge Mwanga ordered his arrest solely based on accusations by his former client, Ms. Maulida Anna Komu, without granting him an opportunity to present his defense. This violates the fundamental principle of “audi alteram partem” (hear the other side), a constitutional right.
– Unavailable Arrest Order:
Despite efforts to locate the arrest warrant on judiciary platforms, Kilatu found no record, suggesting procedural irregularities in its issuance.
– Precedent:
Similar due process violations occurred in “CHADEMA v. Judge Mwanga”, where the judge denied the opposition party legal representation and proceeded “ex-parte”, leading to a biased ruling. In that ruling Chadema’s operations were indefinitely banned!
🧾 2. Forgery Allegations and Advocate-Client Privilege.
– Core Dispute:
Ms. Komu accused Advocate Kilatu of forging court documents to withdraw her from a lawsuit against CHADEMA, which alleged discriminatory resource allocation between mainland Tanzania and Zanzibar. Kilatu maintains Komu initiated the withdrawal.
– Weak Evidence:
Kilatu’s “evidence” (e.g., descriptions of Komu’s home) is immaterial to proving forgery. Digital forensics—like metadata analysis used in “Trevor Patterson’s forgery case” in Jamaica—could resolve this but were not employed.
Moreover, advocate laws require another advocate to sign documents in order to remove “conflict of interest” issues of an advocate administering an oath for a client he is representing. That cardinal principle of law was not observed, complicating the advocate’s exculpatory innocence.
– Conflict of Interest:
As Komu’s attorney, Kilatu held power of attorney. Signing withdrawal documents on her behalf creates a direct conflict, potentially constituting professional misconduct.
🗳️ 3. Political Weaponization of the Judiciary.
– Targeting CHADEMA:
The lawsuit Komu joined (filed by Zanzibar trustees) led to Judge Mwanga’s order suspending “all” CHADEMA activities, freezing assets, and banning political operations. This paralyzed the party’s “No Reform, No Election” campaign ahead of October 2025 polls.
– Executive Interference:
CHADEMA alleges Judge Mwanga—a former Zanzibar Electoral Commission (ZEC) official—colluded with the ruling CCM party to suppress opposition. The ruling mirrored plaintiffs’ requests verbatim, indicating premeditation. The judge’s lack of impartiality is the root of the matter in Chadema’s recusal case. Chadema now seeks Judge Mwanga recusal in deciding the dispute between it and her members of the Board of the Trustees and others.
– Police Complicity:
Authorities enforced the court’s suspension order to disrupt CHADEMA rallies, citing the “High Court Order” as justification.
⚖️ 4. Judicial Misconduct and Broader Implications.
– Parallel Misconduct Cases:
– U.S. v. Judge Dugan:
A Wisconsin judge aided a migrant’s escape from ICE agents, resulting in obstruction charges.
– Tanzanian Judicial Bias:
Judge Mwanga refused CHADEMA’s request for an adjournment after their lawyer withdrew, then ruled against them without representation—a blatant denial of fair hearing rights.
– Consequences for Kilatu:
If convicted, he faces disbarment or imprisonment, akin to lawyers in India (“Vinaykumar Khatu”) and Florida (“Jose Camacho”) who forged documents.
💎 Conclusion: Systemic Injustice and Political Sabotage.
This case exemplifies the”weaponization of judiciary” to crush dissent. Judge Mwanga’s refusal to hear Kilatu, his biased handling of CHADEMA’s case, and the CCM-aligned plaintiffs’ conflicts of interest collectively undermine judicial integrity. Without independent review—and amid election tensions—the arrest and CHADEMA’s suspension appear designed to eliminate opposition under the guise of legal procedure. International oversight is critical to halt this erosion of democracy.
Read more analysis by Rutashubanyuma Nestory
