In the past year, Tanzania has been dealing with tensions surrounding their presidential election in October. There have been claims of election tampering, insurgency, and suppression of the opposing party. In the wake of the election and the resulting political unrest due to these claims, one must question the strength of Tanzania’s democracy, as signs of democratic backsliding become increasingly overt. 

Following its independence from Britain in the 1960s, Tanzania became a single party state ruled by the Chama Cha Mapinduzi (CCM) party. This lasted until the early 1990s, when the country transitioned into a multi-party state. Since then, the country has held multi-party elections categorized by weak democratic competition, which has allowed the CCM to maintain presidential power for over 60 years (with opposition parties maintaining some legislative representation). In 2015 Tanzania’s already limited democracy faced a turning point with the election of President John Magufuli, who cracked down on those who criticized him or his rule. Following Magufuli’s death in 2021 his successor, President Samia Suluhu Hassan, seemed, for a time, to be taking a more liberal path. This soon started to change, however, as President Hassan herself began to employ similarly repressive tactics.

Notably, in April 2025, a little over six months before the presidential election in October, President Hassan’s main political opposition and leader of the opposition party, Tondu Lissu, was arrested for treason after calling for election reform in a rally. There have also been claims that other political opponents of Hassan have disappeared or been arrested as well. These claims led to political tensions in the country, which came to a head on October 29, 2025 when President Hassan won the election with 97% of the vote. She ran virtually uncontested as her political opponents were barred from participating in the election. What followed was a wave of protest that was met with almost a week of violent police crackdown, internet shutdowns, and blackouts. In the wake of this violence President Samia Suluhu Hassan blamed foreigners for the protests and violence. At the same time, UN human rights experts assert the Tanzanian government committed human rights violations and attempted to cover them up. Now, the future of Tanzania’s democracy is, rightfully, being called into question.

One of the defining features of democracy is civic participation, but citizens are limited in their capacity to express their political will. This is why political competition is a crucial feature of democracy, because citizens are only able to express their will through the options they are given in an election. The fewer options citizens have, the less the outcome reflects the will of the people. In the case of Tanzania, where the elected president ran virtually unopposed, the people were not given any other option and thus had no opportunity to reflect their will through their vote. This fact alone is a reflection of Tanzania’s weak democracy, but the intentional obstacles created by the Tanzanian government to prevent political opposition signifies a movement toward authoritarian rule in Tanzania. 

Manipulating elections strategically, is one sign of democratic backsliding. This is when leaders use their means to manipulate the outcome of elections in various manners that can sometimes seem reasonable. This can include laws aimed at disenfranchising a certain voter demographic or creating and enforcing barriers to keep the opposing party from running in elections, as was the case in Tanzania. Lissu’s party, CHADEMA, was disqualified from running entirely in the general election on the grounds that they refused to sign a code of conduct that was required. Many would argue that CHADEMA was given the opportunity to run but refused it of their own volition. CHADEMA, however, argued the code of conduct represented a form of repression and was unconstitutional. Claims like these can make democratic backsliding difficult to identify, as would-be authoritarians use legal pathways that are seemingly straightforward and apolitical in an effort to create barriers that keep their opposition from gaining any power.

Less ambiguous, however, is the arrest of Tondu Lissu. He was arrested on the grounds of treason, and accused of spreading misinformation and inciting a rebellion. In reality Lissu’s alleged “incitement” was his calls for election reform to ensure a free and fair election. Even now Lissu continues to await trial, having been in prison for ten months. This arrest was clearly politically motivated and, ironically, the actions taken against him prove that he did not spread misinformation to incite a rebellion, as the incumbent ultimately ran unopposed in an allegedly multi-party state. 

By functionally silencing all political opposition, the CCM party has proven that Tanzania is a multi-party democracy in name only. Furthermore, in suppressing the opposition that followed the election results, shutting down internet access, violently culling protestors with military and police force, and accusing foreigners of inciting the violence, President Hassan has proven herself  to be an authoritarian leader, willing to violate the human rights of her opposition in order to maintain in power. The democratic backsliding in Tanzania is, at this point, undeniable. Now the question is how will the people, and other nations, respond to the injustices and human rights violations being carried out by Hassan’s government? Furthermore, can a nation that already had weak democratic institutions emerge from this authoritarian regime with a stronger democratic structure?