Dar es Salaam. The High Court at Dar es Salaam Sub-Registry has dismissed a civil case challenging the alleged unequal distribution of resources within the opposition party Chadema between Mainland Tanzania and Zanzibar.
The case, numbered 8323 of 2025, was filed by former party Vice Chairman, Mr Said Issa Mohamed, together with Zanzibar representatives on the party’s Board of Trustees, Mr Ahmed Rashid Khamis and the late Ms Maulida Anna Komu.
Delivering a ruling on Thursday, May 28, 2026, High Court Judge David Ngunyale struck out the case after finding the statement of claim contained legal defects.
The court held that the pleadings failed to clearly indicate when the alleged violations in resource distribution began, rendering the suit procedurally defective.
The respondents were the Registered Trustees of Chadema Registered Trustees and the party’s Secretary General.
The matter had earlier been filed before Judge Hamidu Mwanga at the same Sub-Registry.
At the centre of the dispute were allegations that party resources were being distributed unequally between members in Mainland Tanzania and Zanzibar, raising claims of internal administrative injustice.
Court documents showed that the applicants argued Zanzibar representatives were receiving a smaller share of party funding and logistical support compared to their Mainland counterparts, a situation they said undermined internal party equality and unity.
However, the respondents challenged the admissibility of the case, arguing that it lacked clear timelines and specific legal grounding.
In his ruling, Judge Ngunyale, agreed that the absence of clear commencement dates for the alleged violations made it impossible for the court to properly determine the cause of action.
He further observed that civil pleadings must clearly set out material facts, including when alleged wrongs occurred, to enable fair adjudication.
As a result, the court struck out the suit in its entirety without examining the merits of the resource-sharing allegations.
The ruling effectively leaves the internal party dispute unresolved, although the parties remain free to refile a properly framed case should they choose to do so.
Court officials noted that procedural compliance remains essential in civil litigation to ensure fairness and clarity in judicial proceedings.
Legal experts note that the ruling underscores the importance of precise pleadings in civil disputes, particularly where internal political party governance and resource allocation are contested in court.
The decision is expected to influence how future political disputes are framed in court, particularly requiring litigants to provide clear timelines, factual particulars, and proper legal grounding before filing similar claims.
While the substantive allegations were not examined, the court emphasised that procedural defects alone are sufficient to dispose of a matter at the preliminary stage, reinforcing strict adherence to civil procedure rules in Tanzanian courts, particularly in politically sensitive disputes involving party governance structures and internal administrative accountability issues raised.
