Academic Freedom Under Scrutiny as African Coalition Urges Tanzania to Free Lecturers
By Adonis Byemelwa
Dodoma—The African Coalition for Academic Freedom (ACAF) has called for the immediate release of three university lecturers jailed in Tanzania, taking an already sensitive criminal case to the regional stage and sharpening discussion of academic freedom, due process and the role of universities in Tanzania’s constitutional democracy.
In a formal letter to President Samia Suluhu Hassan, the continental organisation asked the Government to release the lecturers immediately or bring them before a competent court without unnecessary delay.
The appeal says the ongoing detention of academics without immediate judicial supervision risks damaging confidence in both higher education and the justice system.
Professor Kwadwo Appiagyei-Atua, ACAF’s Regional Director for Africa, signed it on 23 July 2026. It expresses concern at the detention of three lecturers since 3 July 2026, and calls upon the authorities to respect constitutional safeguards, legal due process and the principle of academic freedom.
The mentioned lecturers are Johaiven Revelian Bikongolo and Titus Joseph Kituli of St. John’s University of Tanzania (SJUT) and Melkisedeki Kitunzi Kaijage, an Assistant Lecturer in Political Science at the University of Dodoma (UDOM).
The lecturers are said to have encouraged public demonstrations, according to ACAF. Information available to the coalition indicates that one of the lecturers was detained shortly after teaching a class on Ethics and Good Governance, where historical corruption scandals in Tanzania were used as examples to illustrate accountability and public ethics.
The criminal investigation that followed a classroom discussion, says Professor Appiagyei-Atua, could have wider implications for universities across the continent. “The coalition believes ideas discussed in academic settings should not be criminalised unless there is evidence of a law being broken.
ACAF also expressed concern that the lecturers had been held in custody without bail and said information available to the organisation suggested that their employers and families were not promptly notified of their detention. It warned that this could create uncertainty in universities and discourage open scholarly engagement.
The coalition therefore calls on the Government of Tanzania to respect the constitutional and legal rights of the lecturers and to ensure that any criminal proceedings are fully in accordance with the law.
The letter was copied to the Minister for Education, the Attorney General, the Inspector General of Police, and regional and international organisations, including the Commonwealth, the East African Community (EAC), the African Union (AU), and the Southern African Development Community (SADC).
ACAF’s decision to reproduce several regional and international institutions stems from its view that developments affecting academic freedom increasingly attract attention beyond national borders. Universities in Africa continue to work together through regional networks, turning debates over higher education governance into a matter of shared interest, not purely domestic concern.
The coalition’s intervention has added a new dimension to a case already well discussed by lawyers, politicians, civil society organisations and the general public.
Much of this attention has been directed at the prosecution of Kaijage, and his case has become one of the most closely followed legal proceedings involving a university lecturer in Tanzania.
Kaijage was arrested on 8 July 2026 following investigations related to the countrywide Sabasaba protests held on 7 July, according to court proceedings seen.
He was initially charged with a crime, but prosecutors later filed an amended charge sheet adding allegations under legislation dealing with terrorism and economic sabotage. The changes in the charges significantly altered the procedural status of the case, including the issue of bail.
The prosecution alleges that the conduct amounts to criminal offences under Tanzanian law. Kaijage’s legal team dismisses those claims, saying his lectures were part of normal university teaching and scholarly analysis.
The case is still before the courts and the allegations are yet to be determined by trial.” “Like every accused person, Kaijage is presumed innocent until proved guilty beyond reasonable doubt by the prosecution under the Constitution and the principles of criminal justice.
Kaijage is a lecturer in Government and Politics in Tanzania (PO 123), an introductory course in political science covering topics such as constitutional development, governance, political institutions, public administration, elections and democratic practice.
As with similar courses in universities across Africa and beyond, students are encouraged to read political theory alongside contemporary developments. Many teachers consider this method an integral part of developing analytical thinking, citizenship, and public engagement.
The proceedings have thus stimulated a broader reflection on the role of universities in democratic societies. Higher education is supposed to transmit knowledge, but also to promote independent inquiry, respectful debate and evidence-based analysis of public affairs.
However, legal scholars say that with academic freedom comes legal accountability. They have the authority to investigate where criminal offences are suspected to have occurred. It is for the courts to determine whether the evidence available meets the legal requirements of the charges.
The procedural history of the case is part of the national conversation. Kaijage was first arrested and then released on bail by the High Court on the initial charges. Prosecutors filed an amended charge sheet with more serious accusations before the order could be executed, resulting in his continued detention for further court proceedings.
There were varying legal opinions about that chain of events. Some commentators have questioned the implications of filing amended charges after a court has granted bail. Others point out that prosecutors may amend charges where investigations uncover additional evidence, provided the process complies with the law.
Those differing interpretations show how the case goes beyond an individual and into broader issues of prosecutorial discretion, criminal procedure and judicial oversight.
Even political leaders have entered the fray. Chadema Vice Chairman John Heche told journalists in Mwanza on 25 July 2026 that the prosecution was condemning classroom debates on governance, which should not be automatically criminalised.
“He said that historically, universities have been a very important place for informed public debate and he was concerned that the proceedings could discourage open intellectual engagement between lecturers and students. He also said Chadema’s legal team would assist people facing related legal proceedings.
The President of the Tanganyika Law Society (TLS), Boniface Mwabukusi, also spoke publicly about the case.
Mwabukusi said that due process, independence of the judiciary, and respect for the rule of law during criminal proceedings are important. He also said that serious allegations should be prosecuted transparently to maintain public confidence in the justice system.
Veteran journalist and media scholar Dr Ayub Rioba Chacha also weighed in on the wider implications of the case.
Dr Rioba acknowledged the important professional responsibilities of university lecturers, but cautioned against creating an environment that discouraged intellectual inquiry.
He said universities’ role was in the public interest: to get students to look at complex issues through evidence, critical analysis, and respectful discussion.
The case now seems to have moved from a prosecution of individual lecturers to a wider discussion about academic freedom, constitutional governance and the rule of law in Tanzania. Legal analysts say the court’s ruling could influence future decisions on free speech, university teaching and criminal liability.
No matter what the decision, the ruling is set to send shockwaves through universities, policymakers, lawyers, and the future of constitutional debate across the country.
It may also provide important judicial guidance on how to balance academic inquiry with legitimate state interests, setting a major precedent for higher education institutions and the administration of justice in the years to come.
