Vice Chairperson Of CHADEMA, John Heche, Sees Government Hand in Court Orders to Suspend CHADEMA Operations.

Print or Email This Article

John Heche accuses CCM of working in tandem to undermine Chadema’s “No Reform, No Election” initiative that will ultimately restore democracy in Tanzania. He chronicled the proceedings of the High Court before Judge Mwanga, and drew a conclusion that looks like Hon. Judge had a decision in his pocket, and nothing from their side would have flipped it.

What was decided in the High Court to infuriate John Heche? Join me in this tense matter.

Heche riled the High Court Judge on the following grounds:

1. Most of the complainants held top positions in the Chadema Board of Trustees making it untenable that they will sue themselves.

• The chairperson of the Chadema Board of Trustees was Koomu who is the leading litigant!

• Koomu was also a long serving vice chairperson of Chadema and had taken part in the decisions pertaining to the complaint in the court. In his view, she shouldn’t be part of lodging a complaint against decisions she took part in reaching them.

• Since the Chadema  Board of Trustees is constitutionally vested with powers to apportion assets and liabilities of Chadema. It was offensive for members of the Board of Trustees to lodge any complaint in a court of law founded on the decisions they had taken.

• That it was offensive for the complainants to pursue judicial remedies when the chadema has internal mechanisms to address such disputes, and haven’t been exhausted.

• Koomu had confided to three Chadema principals and had confided with them that “unknown people” had pressured her to upend Chadema’s election operations through court proceedings.

• Consequent to their discussions, Koomu had agreed to remove her affidavit that supported the main application against Chadema.

• However,  when she went to court during preliminary hearing, Koomu  recanted her second affidavit signalling pressure from authorities.

• Chadema appointed a lawyer who had recused himself from the matter due to his perception of the Judge’s bias. Normal court procedures demanded the proceedings to be deferred to another date. This was to proffer Chadema ample time to either seek services of another advocate or opt to represent themselves.

1.  The learned Judge Hon. Mwanga chose to proceed with the matter ex-parte violating the rights of the defendants to a fair hearing.

1. Chadema now says the High Court ruling to suspend her operations was reached in absentia breaching principles of natural justice.

1. Chadema is incensed that the High Court ruling mirrored almost all the pleadings of the plaintiffs raising serious red flags of favouritism.

1.  That the two orders of the High Court have now paralyzed Chadema operations ridiculing the whole constitutional order of Multipartyism.

What is really happening? Are Tanzanian courts marionettes of the executive like once said by CCM senior cadre Rostam Aziz who had said in critical cases the executive phone the judiciary to upend cases in their favour?

Here Is My Take:

The High Court’s suspension of Chadema’s operations and John Heche’s accusations reveal a high-stakes political and legal battle in Tanzania, centered on judicial independence, due process violations, and alleged executive interference to suppress opposition. Here is a detailed analysis:

⚖️ 1. High Court Ruling and Heche’s Core Objections. 

– Injunction Details:

 On June 10, 2025, Judge Hamidu Mwanga issued a temporary injunction freezing all Chadema assets and suspending “all political activities” until a June 24 hearing. This was based on a lawsuit by three Zanzibar-based members (Said Issa Mohamed, Ahmed Rashid, Maulida Anna Komu) alleging discriminatory resource allocation and violations of the Political Parties Act.

– Heche’s Key Grounds for Fury: 

  – Conflict of Interest:

Plaintiffs (Komu, Mohamed, Rashid) were “long-serving Chadema trustees” who participated in the decisions they later challenged. Komu, as former Board Chairperson, had approved the resource allocations she now deemed discriminatory.

  – Bypassing Internal Mechanisms:

The plaintiffs sued without exhausting Chadema’s internal dispute resolution processes, violating party protocols. 

  – Judicial Bias:

 Heche accused Judge Mwanga of bias due to his past role in the Zanzibar Electoral Commission (ZEC), which Chadema has historically criticized. The ruling mirrored the plaintiffs’ requests exactly, suggesting premeditation. 

🚨 2. Due Process Violations.

– Ex-Parte Proceedings:

When Chadema’s lawyer, Jebra Kambole, withdrew (citing procedural unfairness), Judge Mwanga refused an adjournment. Instead, he proceeded “ex-parte” (without defense representation), violating Chadema’s right to a fair hearing. 

– Komu’s Coercion Allegations:

Komu allegedly confided to Chadema leaders that “unknown people” pressured her to file the lawsuit. Though she initially withdrew her affidavit, she reversed this stance in court, hinting at external influence. 

– Defective Legal Channels:

Chadema’s subsequent attempt to appeal via the Deputy Registrar was futile, as only the trial judge or the Court of Appeal could modify the injunction. The court dismissed this as procedurally invalid. 

⚡ 3. Political Context: Targeting the “No Reforms, No Election” Campaign.

– The injunction paralyzed Chadema’s nationwide rallies demanding electoral reforms, echoing a broader crackdown: 

  – Chairman Tundu Lissu faces **treason charges** (April 2025). 

  – The National Electoral Commission barred Chadema from October 2025 elections for rejecting a state-mandated “code of conduct“.

– The government has ignored “African Court rulings” (2011, 2018) ordering electoral law reforms, including allowing independent candidates and judicial review of presidential results. 

🧩 4. Judicial Independence Questioned.

– Executive Interference:

Heche and Chadema assert that the ruling aligns with CCM’s efforts to eliminate opposition. This echoes former CCM insider Rostam Aziz’s claim that “in critical cases, the executive phones the judiciary“. 

– Parallels to Past Bias:

Judge Mwanga dismissed Chadema’s preliminary objections without substantive hearing, and his injunction extended beyond asset disputes to ban **all activities**—exceeding the lawsuit’s scope. 

📅 Timeline of Key Events.

💎 Concluding Remarks.

The High Court’s ruling—delivered without Chadema’s representation, based on a lawsuit by conflicted trustees, and crippling the opposition’s electoral reform campaign—strongly suggests executive-judicial collusion.

Heche’s accusations align with documented patterns: ignoring international court orders, weaponizing legal systems, and suppressing dissent. Whether Tanzanian courts are “marionettes of the executive” remains contentious, but the handling of this case starkly undermines judicial credibility and multiparty democracy. The June 24 hearing will test whether judicial independence can prevail.

Read more analysis by Rutashubanyuma Nestory