Shadrack Chaula is under guard following his sentencing. Photo: Courtesy
Young Artist Fined Sh5 Million or Two Years in Jail for Defaming Tanzanian President
By Adonis Byemelwa
Rungwe, Mbeya – Shadrack Chaula, a 24-year-old artist, has been sentenced to either pay a fine of Sh5 million or serve two years in prison for burning a photo of President Samia Suluhu Hassan and spreading false information.
The verdict was handed down by Senior Resident Magistrate Shamla Shehagilo on July 4, 2024, at the Rungwe District Court in Mbeya Region, after Chaula, a resident of Ntokela village, admitted to the crime.
Chaula was found guilty of disseminating false information via the social media platform TikTok, a violation of the Cybercrimes Act under Section 16.
Prosecutor Rosemary Mgenije, assisted by lawyer Veronica Mtafya, presented the case, detailing that on June 22, 2024, in Ntokela, Chaula posted a video on his TikTok account @jet.fightershop.
In the video, he held a picture of President Samia and declared, “Since you have failed to protect our nation from homosexuality, this video is about you and no one else,” knowing these claims to be false and misleading to the public.
Despite no prior criminal record, the prosecution urged the court to impose a harsh penalty to deter others from disrespecting the President. When given the chance to defend himself, Chaula remained silent.
Magistrate Shehagilo subsequently sentenced him to pay a Sh5 million fine or face two years in prison. By the close of the court session, Chaula had not paid the fine and was taken to prison.
Chaula’s troubles began after recording a short video in which he made severe accusations against President Samia and then burned her photo, an act that sparked outrage among officials and the public.
On June 30, 2024, Mbeya Regional Police Commander Benjamin Kuzaga announced Chaula’s arrest following directives from Mbeya Regional Commissioner Juma Homera, who demanded the young man be apprehended and brought to justice for his actions.
Critics argue that cases involving defamation of the head of state are expedited, while numerous magistrates complain of backlogs in cases involving ordinary citizens, raising concerns about whether justice delayed is justice denied.
In developed countries, defamation cases against presidents are often handled with a careful balance between protecting free speech and respecting the office. This typically results in lesser penalties rather than severe punitive measures.
For instance, in Germany and the USA, defamation involving high-profile figures usually leads to fines or civil suits rather than jail time, according to Iverson John from Detroit, USA.
Joseph Byarushengo, a member of the diaspora in France, notes that such matters emphasize freedom of expression unless the statements incite violence or hatred.
In contrast, Rwanda and Uganda enforce stringent measures similar to those in Tanzania, where defamation of the President can lead to severe consequences, says Yuda Lugona, a Ugandan living in Cambodia.
This disparity in judicial approaches underscores ongoing debates about equality before the law and the protection of democratic values.
Chaula’s case highlights the tension between maintaining respect for national leaders and upholding individual rights, raising critical questions about the balance of justice in contemporary society.
