SECTOR 1

1.4 Government honours regional and international
instruments on freedom of expression and
freedom of the media
Tanzania is a dualist state – jargon used in international law to describe a country
that separates its national laws from international treaties and other instruments.
Consequently, international instruments signed and ratified by Tanzania do not
automatically become law. Unless such instruments are ‘translated’ into national
laws, they are not recognised as applicable laws within Tanzania. Panellists said
that because of this arrangement, international instruments relating to freedom of
expression that have been ratified by Tanzania are hardly respected in the country.
Panellists stated that when it suits the government, principles and clauses
from international treaties are included in the national law ‘in tiny bits’. It was
also the view of the panel that the authorities were more inclined to ignore
international treaties altogether, which they then fail to honour. For example,
Tanzania has not met its obligations to report regularly on the state of press
freedom and guaranteed human rights, even though the country has ratified the
African Charter and the United Nations Convention on the Rights of People with
Disability, which require such reports from parties. To drive home the point, one
panellist said, ‘Our commitment to international human rights standards, even in
the judiciary, is so little that we do not tend to mention it.’
There have been some attempts to test Tanzania’s dualist status and general
disregard for international instruments. In March 2019, the East African Court of
Justice (EACJ). ruled that many provisions of the Media Services Act contravened
freedom of expression and press freedom provisions of the treaty establishing the
East African Community. The EACJ called on Tanzania to repeal those provisions,
notably those dealing with sedition, criminal libel and publication of false
information. Media rights organisations praised the ruling11 as an essential step
in addressing Tanzania’s declining freedom of expression and media freedom
record. Tanzania has appealed the ruling and at the time of the AMB, the
repressive provisions of the Media Services Act were still applicable.

Scores:
Individual scores:
1

Country does not meet indicator

2

Country meets only a few aspects of indicator

3

Country meets some aspects of indicator

4

Country meets most aspects of indicator

5

Country meets all aspects of the indicator

Average score:
Score of previous years:

✓

✓

✓✓✓✓✓✓

✓

✓✓

✓

2 .1
2006: n/a; 2008: n/a; 2010: 2.2; 2012: 3.3; 2015: 2.5

11 See for example CPJ. Available online at https://cpj.org/2019/03/east-african-court-rules-that-tanzanias-media-serv.php.

17

AFRICAN MEDIA BAROMETER TANZANIA 2019

Select target paragraph3