Inquiry asserts report credibility

• Cites solid evidence, warns against scapegoating

DAR ES SALAAM: THE Commission of Inquiry into the October 29th 2025 incident has affirmed the authenticity and integrity of its report, stressing that its findings are grounded in scientific methodologies, extensive public participation and verifiable evidence collected over 153 days of intensive work.

The remarks were made yesterday by Commission Chairperson, retired Chief Justice Mohamed Chande Othman, alongside other commissioners during a meeting with editors and journalists at the Julius Nyerere International Convention Centre (JNICC) in Dar es Salaam. The session aimed to explain key findings of the report and respond to questions.

Justice Chande said the commission operated under clear terms of reference, including identifying the causes of the violence, those responsible, its social and economic impact, and proposing measures to prevent future unrest.

He said that the credibility of the report is anchored in the depth and diversity of evidence gathered.

According to him, the commission relied heavily on sworn testimonies, both oral and written, which are admissible in court.

Witnesses testified under oath, while others submitted sworn written statements, ensuring that the findings are based on legally sound processes. In addition to testimonies, the commission utilised digital tools to collect data.

A total of 4,891 online questionnaires were received and analysed, all designed in line with the commission’s terms of reference.

Justice Chande said this approach enabled the commission to capture a broader range of perspectives from across the country. Public hearings and targeted engagements formed another key pillar of the inquiry.

The commission conducted sessions n 11 regions, engaging 21 special groups and reaching 3,565 participants.

Furthermore, commissioners met face-to-face with 6,205 individuals, an effort Justice Chande described as unprecedented within such a limited timeframe.

“Ask yourselves, which commission in the world has met that number of people directly within 153 days? There is none,” he said, noting that the team interviewed an average of up to 40 witnesses per day.

He added that although the unrest involved breaches of peace, typically handled by law enforcement, the commission deliberately prioritised testimonies from victims rather than relying heavily on police accounts.

This approach, he said, ensured that the voices of those most affected were central to the findings.

On accountability, Justice Chande said the commission supports holding those responsible to account but cautioned that such processes must be fair and strictly adhere to the law.

ALSO READ: Chande Commission notes danger in intolerance toward differing views

He warned against scapegoating and unjust prosecutions. Echoing these sentiments, former Chief Justice Ibrahim Juma said the commission’s conclusions were shaped by extensive firsthand engagement with witnesses.

He noted that commissioners’ perspectives may differ significantly from those who did not directly observe testimonies.

He added that the commission’s recommendations are based on thorough examination of evidence rather than superficial or theoretical considerations.

Prof Juma also addressed earlier concerns regarding the legality and composition of the commission, recalling that its legitimacy had been challenged in court.

He said the High Court ultimately upheld the commission, providing guidance that strengthened its work and addressed key issues raised by critics.

Among the concerns raised were alleged conflicts of interest among commissioners, questions about their age, and the absence of representatives from certain professional and civil society groups.

According to Prof Juma, the court’s decision reflected evolving legal standards, particularly in areas such as human rights protection, witness safeguarding, and the right of individuals named in proceedings to respond.

He explained that, in line with these principles, the commission at times received testimony in private sessions to protect witnesses and ensure fairness.

In cases where individuals were mentioned by name, confidentiality was necessary to avoid violating their right of reply.

On the question of independence, Prof Juma stressed that the integrity of a commission does not depend on the personal backgrounds of its members, but on strict adherence to legal procedures and the oath of impartiality taken by commissioners.

He challenged critics to be transparent about the methodologies behind their opinions, arguing that the commission’s findings are credible because they are evidence-based and traceable.

“Our views are grounded in evidence. Everything we have stated can be traced back to documented proof. That is what gives our conclusions weight,” he said.

Addressing calls for an international inquiry, Prof Juma cautioned against turning to external mechanisms before exhausting domestic legal and constitutional processes.

He questioned how such an inquiry would be constituted, the legal framework it would operate under, and how it would exercise authority within Tanzania.

He argued that the establishment of the commission itself demonstrates the country’s commitment to investigating the matter internally.

He reiterated that the commission’s mandate was not to assign guilt or deliver judgments, but to establish facts and recommend possible actions.

While the report identifies individuals involved in planning, coordinating, and financing the violence, he stressed that due legal process must be followed before any action is taken, including giving those implicated an opportunity to respond.

Prof Juma also expressed concern about growing intolerance of differing opinions, particularly on social media, where individuals expressing alternative views often face harassment. He emphasised that a healthy democracy depends on open dialogue and mutual respect.