The Council of Imam under the secretary general Sheikh Ponda has issued a strong statement that on 29th October 2025 there was no election but a fabricated election verdict. This is what he has said:
Most polling stations did not conduct voting at all. Voters did not show up to vote in most polling stations.
The exercise of counting and tallying votes was not performed in most polling booths.
Polling agents were not issued with copies of forms of the election verdicts.
Copies of polling booths’ tallied election results were not displayed on public boards as required by the election laws.
Polling booth tallied results which were nonexistent were not transported to wards for further tallying process.
At constituency level there was no tallying of nonexistent ward tallied election results.
In many parts of Tanzania most voters didn’t show up to vote for a variety of reasons.
As a result, information in the aforementioned confirms beyond reasonable doubt that on the date of election of 29th October 2025 there was no election in Tanzania for ward councillors, MPs and president in the whole country.
International observers reports were uniquely identical, a damning indictment of election malpractice as follows: repression of voter rights, the election did not observe the election law, the wanton and indiscriminate killings of innocent citizens, and cooked election results.
An Indictment of Legitimacy: A Systematic Breakdown of the 2025 Tanzanian Electoral Process!
Based on a thorough analysis of Sheikh Ponda – the secretary general of the Council of Imam of Tanzania’s report and the principles of legal and logical reasoning, we can assess the claim that “there was no election in Tanzania for ward councillors, MPs and president in the whole country” on 29th October 2025.
Here is a breakdown of the indictment and the supporting evidence:
Summary of the Allegations from Sheikh Ponda and International Observers.
The core allegations can be categorized as follows:
1. Failure of Process:
Widespread failure to conduct the fundamental acts of voting, counting, and tallying.
2. Lack of Transparency:
Failure to follow legally mandated procedures for displaying and distributing results forms.
3. Voter Absence/Suppression:
A claim that most voters did not show up, implying either a boycott or repression.
4. External Corroboration:
International observers confirming malpractice, repression, and “cooked results.”
5. The “Cooked Results” Conclusion:
The assertion that since no valid process occurred, all declared results were fabricated.
A Sham Election: How Evidence Points to a Systemic Collapse in Tanzania’s 2025 Vote.
In-Depth Analysis: “No Election” vs. “Severely Flawed Election”.
The central question is whether the evidence proves beyond a reasonable doubt that no election occurred, as opposed to a catastrophically flawed, illegitimate, and fraudulent one.
Arguments Supporting the “No Election” Conclusion:
1. Systemic Collapse of Core Procedures:
The indictment doesn’t just claim fraud in counting; it claims the counting and tallying “was not performed” in most places. If the core function of an election—casting and counting votes—did not happen in “most” polling stations, the event’s very nature as an election is negated. An election is defined by these processes.
2. Complete Breakdown in the Results Chain:
The text describes a total failure at every stage of the results transmission:
· No tallying at polling booths.
· No forms given to agents.
· No results displayed publicly.
· No transportation of results to the ward level.
· No tallying at the constituency level.
This paints a picture of a non-existent logistical process. If these steps did not occur, there was no legitimate pipeline through which results could have flowed, making any declared results inherently fabricated.
3. The “Nonexistent” Results:
The repeated use of the word “nonexistent” is a powerful legal and rhetorical point. It asserts a complete absence of a genuine electoral outcome at the most basic level.
4. Corroboration by Observers:
The damning reports from international observers, specifically mentioning “cooked results,” lend significant credibility to the internal allegations. It moves the claim from a partisan statement to one with external validation.
Arguments Creating Reasonable Doubt about “No Election”:
1. The Problem of “Most”:
The statement uses qualifiers like “most polling stations” and “in many parts of Tanzania.” This logically allows for the possibility that in some polling stations, in some parts of the country, voting and counting did occur. A claim of “no election in the whole country” requires evidence of a 100% failure rate, which the oral report does not explicitly provide.
2. Distinction Between Process and Event:
A court or impartial analyst might distinguish between the event (polling stations being open, some people voting) and the process (a free, fair, and transparent count). They could argue a severely flawed election still technically occurred, even if its outcome is wholly illegitimate.
3. Cause of Voter Absence:
The statement says “voters did not show up for a variety of reasons.” This could include voluntary boycott, which is different from the state physically preventing an election from taking place. The observer’s mention of “repression of voter rights,” however, strongly suggests the state’s role in the low turnout.
The wholly disqualification of Chadema, trumped up treason charge on Tundu Lissu, a potential Chadema presidential candidate, and Luhaga Lupina of Act Wazalendo as a presidential candidate definitely convinced most voters that the whole exercise was an illegal coronation of CCM, not worthy of taking part to condone electoral malfeasance.
4. Alternative Explanation (The Government’s Likely Defense):
The government would likely argue that voting did occur, that the opposition is exaggerating isolated incidents, and that their declared results are based on the genuine, albeit perhaps imperfect, votes that were cast. They would dismiss the Council of Imam’s statement as partisan.
The Fabricated Results: Why Tanzania’s 2025 Election Was Not a Democratic Process.
Conclusion Beyond a Reasonable Doubt.
Based solely on the information provided by Sheikh Ponda, can we confirm beyond a reasonable doubt that no election occurred in the entire country?
· For a layperson or a political actor:
The evidence is overwhelming and would be considered conclusive. The systematic breakdown of every step, the declaration of “nonexistent” results, and the external corroboration paint a picture of a complete sham where the ritual of voting was abandoned in favor of outright fabrication. The conclusion that “there was no election” is a logically sound interpretation of the described reality.
· In a strict legal or forensics context:
A sliver of “reasonable doubt” remains due to the use of the word “most” and not “all.” A rigorous legal standard might conclude that the evidence proves a total collapse of the electoral process’s legitimacy and transparency, resulting in wholly fabricated results, but it stops just short of irrefutably proving that not a single vote was cast or counted in any station across the entire nation.
Final Verdict:
The indictment from Sheikh Ponda and the Council of Imam, especially when combined with the international observers’ reports, presents a compelling and credible case that the 29th October 2025 election in Tanzania was a complete farce.
While the strictest legal standard might focus on the qualifier “most,” the logical and practical conclusion from the evidence is that the declared results for ward councillors, MPs, and the president were not the product of any recognizable democratic election.
They were, as stated, “cooked results.” Therefore, for all practical purposes—politically, morally, and in the court of public opinion—the claim that there was no real election in Tanzania on that date is confirmed by the evidence provided. The event was a fraudulent exercise designed to legitimize a pre-determined outcome, devoid of the fundamental processes that define a genuine election.
