Why Tanzania Needs a Law to Criminalize False Political Promises

 

Why Tanzania Needs a Law to Criminalize False Political Promises

By [Johnson Yesaya], Lawyer.

---

1. Introduction

Tanzania is a democratic country matured politically, but its legal framework still lags behind in one crucial area, the accountability of politicians for false promises. Every election cycle, citizens are flooded with pledges: free education, affordable healthcare, improved livelihoods, and rapid development. Yet, many of these promises are made without any feasibility study, expertise, or genuine intent to implement them.

Politics in Tanzania has, unfortunately, become a career refuge for individuals with little or no technical knowledge, leadership competence, or commitment to public service. The political platform has become a gateway to personal enrichment through salaries, privileges, and allowances rather than a genuine mechanism for serving the people. This reality calls for legal reform. It is time to consider a specific law that holds politicians criminally accountable for making deliberate, false, and misleading promises to the public.

---

2. The Current Legal Vacuum

Under the current legal regime in Tanzania, there is no statute directly mandating politicians to fulfill their campaign promises or criminalizing false political pledges. Accountability is left to moral and political mechanisms such as public scrutiny or electoral rejection, which are weak and ineffective once a person assumes office.

The Penal Code [Cap. 16 R.E. 2022] provides for offences such as obtaining goods by false pretences (section 302) and fabricating evidence (section 106). However, these provisions are ill-suited to the political context:

• Section 302 punishes those who, “by false pretence and with intent to defraud, obtain anything capable of being stolen.” Political promises, however, involve intangible expectations not “things capable of being stolen.” Thus, a politician who gains votes through deceit cannot be prosecuted under this section.

• Section 106 concerns fabricated evidence in judicial proceedings, not falsehoods uttered in political rallies.

These provisions were crafted for private fraud and judicial misconduct, not public deception in political competition. Therefore, they cannot effectively address the moral and social injury caused by false campaign promises.

---

3. Political Promises as Public Fraud

At its core, a false political promise is a form of fraud against the electorate. When a candidate knowingly makes unrealistic or deceitful pledges to secure votes, they are obtaining a public office through misrepresentation. Citizens vote based on trust, believing the candidate will deliver. When that trust is manipulated for personal or party gain, it constitutes public deception, a breach of democratic integrity.

While some promises fail due to unforeseen circumstances, many are made without any intent or capacity to fulfill them. For example, a politician who promises free tertiary education or massive infrastructure projects without any fiscal plan or resource analysis acts with reckless disregard for the truth. In law, recklessness with intent to gain advantage through deception is a core ingredient of criminal fraud.

Hence, the absence of a law treating deliberate false political promises as a punishable offence leaves citizens unprotected against political deceit.

---

4. Why Political Accountability Acts Are Not Enough

The Political Parties Act (Cap. 258) provides mechanisms for registration, internal democracy, and financing of political parties. Yet, it does not extend to the truthfulness of manifestos or political promises. The Registrar of Political Parties supervises compliance with party regulations, not individual accountability for deceitful campaigns.

Similarly, the Election Act focuses on fair conduct of elections — not on post-election performance or truthfulness of promises. The result is a governance gap where leaders can promise anything, win power, and never face consequences for deliberate deception.

---

5. Proposal: The Political Integrity and Accountability Act

To address this, Tanzania should enact a Political Integrity and Accountability Act, incorporating criminal provisions that:

1. Criminalize deliberate false political promises made with the intent to obtain public office or personal benefit.

2. Require all political parties and candidates to submit a Manifesto Implementation Plan within a defined period after assuming office.

3. Empower oversight bodies such as the Registrar of Political Parties, Controller and Auditor General (CAG), or an independent Political Integrity Commission to verify the feasibility and progress of key promises.

4. Provide for sanctions such as fines, disqualification from future elections, or criminal prosecution for willful deceit.

5. Protect politicians who act in good faith — acknowledging that genuine failures due to economic or unforeseen constraints should not attract liability.

Such a law would not criminalize political failure, but political fraud — the deliberate act of misleading citizens for personal gain.

---

6. Anticipated Benefits

• Restoration of Public Trust: Citizens would regain faith that political competition is about service, not deception.

• Quality Leadership: Only those with realistic, evidence-based agendas would seek office.

• Democratic Maturity: Political discourse would shift from empty rhetoric to measurable goals.

• Legal Deterrence: The risk of criminal liability would deter opportunists from abusing electoral platforms.

---

7. Conclusion

The time has come for Tanzania to move beyond moral appeals and introduce legal accountability in politics. Political deceit is not mere rhetoric; it is a breach of public trust and an act of collective fraud against the people.

Just as private fraud is punishable under the Penal Code, public fraud through political lies should be criminalized. Enacting a law to this effect would mark a historic step in Tanzania’s democratic evolution — ensuring that leadership is not a safe haven for opportunists, but a sacred contract between the elected and the electorate.

It is not enough to promise. It is time to be held accountable for what is promised.