By John Q. Hosedrinker 
Tanzanian President Samia Hassan Suluhu defended the police’s use of force during election protests in October, claiming protesters intended to overthrow the government. She asserted the government deployed necessary force to quell what she characterized as violent acts, not mere protests. Furthermore, President Hassan criticized international bodies, including the European Union, for condemning the violence, accusing them of colonialist attitudes. The October election was marred by an internet shutdown, opposition candidate disqualifications, and a brutal crackdown on protesters, with numerous fatalities reported and condemned by international observers.
Read the original article here
Tanzania’s president justifies brutal killings during election protests, and the situation paints a grim picture. It’s difficult to accept a reported 98% vote share, especially when juxtaposed with accounts of internet shutdowns, restrictions on opposition, and, most damningly, the reported use of lethal force against protestors. This isn’t just about a close election; it speaks to the very heart of democratic principles.
The president’s justification of the violence, framing it as a necessary measure against a planned government overthrow, rings hollow. Her statement suggests that any dissenting voice, any act of protest, was inherently a threat. This narrative attempts to legitimize the use of excessive force, which is a dangerous path. The very concept of a “smallest force” in response to protest is a disturbing one when it results in the deaths of civilians.
Moreover, the international community’s concerns are dismissed. The President’s disdain for the European Union’s criticism and the accusations of colonialism are a common tactic of autocrats. Instead of addressing the allegations of electoral violence and human rights abuses, the President deflects with nationalistic rhetoric. This approach further isolates the nation and undermines any pretense of upholding democratic values.
The reports of mass graves and bodies dumped in morgues, described as being stacked upon one another, paint a disturbing picture. These actions raise questions about transparency and accountability. Why the rush to dispose of the dead? What were the authorities trying to hide? These are questions that demand immediate and independent investigation, which are not currently happening.
The timing of the events is also troubling. The post-election investigation by CNN, alongside the African Union and Southern African Development Community observers, highlight issues with the integrity of the process. The fact that the inauguration took place in a military camp, rather than a public ceremony, further adds to the climate of suspicion and fear.
Another concerning aspect is the gag on the local media. Any government that silences the press and threatens its citizens for sharing content is signaling a deep-seated fear of scrutiny. It reveals the fragile nature of her support and raises questions about her legitimacy.
The reported voter turnout and results are highly suspect, as it is difficult to imagine a free and fair election with 98% in the voting results. The very fact that the president barred major opposition parties from campaigning and participating further undermines any claims of a democratic process. Such massive margins rarely reflect reality and often suggest widespread electoral fraud.
This situation reveals a troubling pattern of behavior. The suppression of dissent, the violent response to protests, and the blatant disregard for international standards all suggest a leader determined to cling to power at any cost.
It’s disheartening to consider the future for Tanzania and its people. This situation is far from ideal.