POLITICS
President Samia Suluhu Hassan and Tanzania’s Descent into Authoritarianism
Published
4 weeks agoon
By
Editor
Baba Yunus Muhammad
The woman once hailed as a reformer has tightened her grip on power, crossing red lines even her authoritarian predecessor hesitated to breach.
When Samia Suluhu Hassan became president of Tanzania in March 2021, following the sudden death of John Pombe Magufuli, the mood across the nation and much of Africa was one of guarded hope. Here was a woman whose calm demeanor, religious integrity, and inclusive rhetoric seemed to promise a new chapter for Tanzania — a country exhausted by years of repression, paranoia, and fear. Hassan, the first female head of state in Tanzania’s history and the only Muslim woman leading a nation in Africa, projected humility and pragmatism. She was viewed as a potential reformer who might steer the country back toward democratic governance after the suffocating rule of Magufuli.
That hope has since evaporated. Four years into her presidency, and with elections looming in October 2025, Samia Suluhu Hassan stands accused of dismantling the very democratic ideals she once symbolized. Her administration has tightened its grip on power through a pattern of repression that surpasses even the authoritarian excesses of her predecessor. The dream of a more open, accountable Tanzania has withered under a system that now combines the outward trappings of democracy with the inner logic of autocracy.
The transformation has been gradual but unmistakable. When Hassan took office, she began by speaking the language of reconciliation. She reopened a few banned newspapers, reached out to exiled opposition figures, and allowed political rallies that had been outlawed under Magufuli. These gestures were interpreted as signs of liberalization. Western diplomats, eager to rehabilitate Tanzania’s image, praised her as a “listening leader.” Civil society activists cautiously welcomed the apparent thaw. The international community, fatigued by years of dealing with Magufuli’s hostility, seemed relieved.
But beneath this veneer of reform, the architecture of repression remained intact. Within two years, the government’s tone began to harden. Promises of political openness gave way to arrests, intimidation, and censorship. Opposition rallies were again restricted, media outlets were warned against “incitement,” and journalists were summoned by police for questioning. By 2024, as local elections approached, reports of widespread manipulation began surfacing once more. Ballot irregularities, intimidation of observers, and biased rulings by the electoral commission signaled that Tanzania’s experiment with democracy had once again turned hollow.
Many observers compared Hassan’s governing style to that of her predecessor. But a closer look reveals that she has gone further — crossing red lines Magufuli himself never dared. The most striking example is her treatment of political opposition. Tundu Lissu, the charismatic lawyer and leader of the opposition party Chadema, was charged with treason in April 2025, a non-bailable offense that carries the death penalty. Lissu, who survived an assassination attempt in 2017, had become a symbol of democratic defiance in Tanzania. His detention represents a chilling escalation: not just the silencing of dissent, but its criminalization at the highest possible level.
Another opposition figure, Luhaga Mpina, was disqualified from contesting the presidency under dubious circumstances. The Registrar of Political Parties — a presidential appointee — barred Mpina’s candidacy at the last minute, citing technicalities. When the High Court ordered that he be reinstated, the Electoral Commission, nominally independent but clearly aligned with the ruling party, ignored the ruling and barred him again. As of now, Hassan faces no credible opponent in the October polls. It is a political landscape without precedent since Tanzania reintroduced multiparty democracy in 1992.
Even within her own ruling party, Chama cha Mapinduzi (CCM), dissent is no longer tolerated. Humphrey Polepole, a senior CCM stalwart turned critic, was abducted in October 2025 after criticizing Hassan’s leadership. The police later claimed he was being investigated for “criminal speech.” His disappearance sent a clear message: loyalty to the president has become indistinguishable from loyalty to the state.
The erosion of Tanzania’s democratic norms under Hassan’s leadership reflects not merely a continuation of autocracy but its consolidation. For decades, CCM has maintained its grip on power through patronage, control of state institutions, and manipulation of electoral rules. The move to multiparty politics in the early 1990s was meant to dilute that dominance. Instead, it entrenched it. Elections were never free, but they were at least competitive. Now, even the pretense of competition is fading. As veteran Tanzanian columnist Jenerali Ulimwengu lamented recently, “there is no competition worth the name.”
This tightening of control is accompanied by an alarming assault on the digital public sphere. In a stark departure from Magufuli’s practice of post-election shutdowns, Hassan’s government has preemptively blocked access to major social media platforms — including X (formerly Twitter), Telegram, and Clubhouse — months ahead of the election. JamiiForums, Tanzania’s most vibrant online platform for citizen journalism, has been taken offline entirely. The effect is suffocating: a silenced public discourse, cut off from the outside world, unable to document or resist the unfolding repression.
Meanwhile, the rhythms of state-sponsored violence continue. Opposition activists are harassed, journalists intimidated, and rallies disrupted by police. Civil society organizations operate under constant surveillance. The government’s rhetoric has shifted subtly but decisively — from promises of “dialogue and reform” to warnings about “national security” and “foreign interference.” The same vocabulary that once justified Magufuli’s strongman politics has re-emerged under a softer, more polished face.
This duality — the autocrat in reformist clothing — makes Hassan’s leadership uniquely insidious. She presents herself internationally as a modernizer and peacemaker, while domestically consolidating power through fear. The optics are carefully managed: lavish rallies, choreographed crowds, and speeches that blend maternal warmth with firm resolve. Political researcher Nicodemus Minde has described these events as “procedural coronation rituals,” where the illusion of democratic participation masks the inevitability of the outcome.
Yet to understand how Tanzania arrived at this point, one must look beyond individual personalities to structural factors. Since independence in 1961, CCM and its predecessor, TANU, have cultivated an unbroken monopoly on political life. Even as the country transitioned to multipartyism, CCM retained control over the civil service, the judiciary, the media, and the economy. Opposition parties were permitted to exist but never to thrive. When the opposition became genuinely competitive — particularly after 2015, under Chadema’s rise — repression intensified. Magufuli’s harsh measures in 2020 ensured CCM’s total domination of parliament. Hassan inherited this political machine and, rather than dismantle it, has perfected it.
The international context has also emboldened her. The retreat of Western democracies from active democracy promotion has created a permissive environment for authoritarian consolidation across Africa. Under Donald Trump’s second term, the United States drastically reduced funding for governance and human rights programs. European donors, grappling with migration crises and wars in Ukraine and the Middle East, have deprioritized African political reform. In this vacuum, leaders like Hassan have found greater room for autocratic maneuvering. The global decline in democratic norms has provided both the example and the cover for repression.
Hassan’s case is part of a broader trend. Across Africa and beyond, leaders are criminalizing opposition under the guise of combating terrorism or protecting sovereignty. In Turkey, opposition leader Ekrem İmamoğlu faces jail on terrorism charges; in Mozambique, Venâncio Mondlane faces similar accusations. Hassan’s Tanzania fits neatly into this global pattern: regimes that mimic the symbols of democracy — elections, courts, parliaments — while hollowing them out from within.
For Tanzanians, this political regression carries deep emotional weight. The country has long prided itself on stability, moderation, and a tradition of peaceful politics. Julius Nyerere’s vision of unity and dialogue still resonates in the national consciousness. But the current trajectory threatens to undo that legacy. The imprisonment of opposition leaders, the silencing of journalists, and the erosion of judicial independence are more than isolated abuses; they signal a fundamental rupture in the social contract.
Perhaps the greatest tragedy lies in the betrayal of expectations. Hassan’s rise was interpreted, especially by women and Muslims across Africa, as a symbol of progress — a moment when faith, gender, and democracy could coexist harmoniously. Instead, her rule has deepened cynicism toward democracy itself. Many Tanzanians now speak of elections as a “national performance” rather than a genuine choice. The sense of betrayal cuts deep: that even a leader once seen as compassionate and reform-minded could succumb to the corrupting logic of absolute power.
As the 2025 elections approach, the atmosphere in Tanzania is one of subdued tension. On one side, Hassan’s government projects confidence, orchestrating massive rallies and emphasizing continuity and stability. On the other, the opposition is leaderless, fragmented, and under siege. Civil society operates in fear, and the media landscape is barren. International observers, if they are even permitted to attend, will likely witness an election stripped of suspense, conducted under conditions that render its outcome predetermined.
In private, many Tanzanians express despair. They have seen this story before: a ruling party invoking national unity to justify repression, a leader manipulating legality to mask illegitimacy, and an electorate reduced to spectators. The difference now is that the illusion of reform has collapsed completely. The hope that democracy might be restored under a new face has faded into disillusionment.
It is tempting to view Tanzania’s descent into authoritarianism as part of a cyclical pattern — the ebb and flow of democracy in Africa. But what makes the present moment distinct is its finality. By barring her opponents, censoring her critics, and erasing avenues of dissent, President Samia Suluhu Hassan is not merely tilting the political playing field; she is closing it altogether. The outcome of the 2025 election is already clear. What remains uncertain is how long Tanzanians will endure governance without genuine accountability, and whether the world will continue to look away.
In the end, Hassan’s legacy may not be one of reform or progress but of disillusionment — the quiet entrenchment of authoritarianism under the guise of civility. Tanzania’s democratic promise, once fragile but alive, now flickers faintly in the shadows of state power. The woman once celebrated as a beacon of new hope has become the custodian of an old tyranny, proving again that in much of Africa, democracy remains less a system of governance than a performance of legitimacy — and the ballot box, for all its ritual sanctity, still an empty gesture.
About the Author:
Baba Yunus Muhammad is the President of the Africa Islamic Economic Forum and a seasoned political analyst focusing on governance, democracy, and socio-economic transformation across Africa. He writes extensively on the intersection of faith, leadership, and political reform on the continent. babayunus@icloud.com
You may like
POLITICS
Ceasefire or Cycle? Gaza and the Politics of a Manufactured Peace
Published
1 day agoon
November 10, 2025By
Editor
Baba Yunus Muhammad
When dawn broke over Gaza on the 9th of November, 2025, it brought neither peace nor silence. The roar of Israeli jets shattered the pretense of calm as explosions tore through crowded neighborhoods, refugee camps, and hospital shelters. By morning, at least 104 Palestinians were dead — 35 of them children. Among the ruins stood the Insan camp, a temporary refuge for cancer patients, reduced to dust and disbelief.
The strikes came just three weeks after a ceasefire agreement that the world hailed as a “turning point.” For Palestinians, ceasefires have long ceased to mean peace. They are pauses — brief, exhausted silences before the next storm.
Anatomy of a Fragile Ceasefire
The October 10 ceasefire, brokered by U.S. President Donald Trump, was the latest in a series of fragile truces. Like its predecessors, it emerged not from mutual understanding but mutual fatigue. Israel retained control of Gaza’s airspace, borders, and sea routes; its drones continued to hover overhead; its army remained positioned just beyond the fence. Gaza, meanwhile, was expected to disarm while receiving little relief from a blockade that has strangled its economy for more than seventeen years.
Netanyahu’s renewed airstrikes followed a firefight in which an Israeli soldier was killed. Hamas denied initiating the clash, accusing Israeli troops of provocation. The immediate spark came amid public outrage in Israel over Hamas handing over fragments of a hostage’s body — remains Israeli forces claimed to have recovered two years earlier. The symbolism ignited nationalist fury, and Netanyahu reached for a familiar weapon: war.
War as Political Theatre
To understand why ceasefires collapse, one must look beyond the battlefield to the political theatre surrounding it. Netanyahu has long used Gaza’s suffering as a backdrop for domestic consolidation. Each escalation allows him to recast himself as Israel’s “protector,” diverting attention from corruption charges, coalition infighting, and mounting social unrest.
For Hamas, resistance remains a key source of legitimacy. Under siege since 2007, governing one of the most densely populated and impoverished territories on earth, defiance is a declaration of existence. Each exchange of fire sustains the cycle: Israel bombs to restore deterrence; Hamas fires back to restore dignity. Civilians are left to mourn, rebuild, and wait for the next pause — one that will hold just long enough for the world to look away.
Ceasefire Without Justice
Ceasefires in Gaza are often truce agreements without justice. They pause the violence but leave structural oppression intact. Since 2009, more than a dozen ceasefires have been declared, yet the roots of the conflict — occupation, displacement, blockade — remain. The siege restricts movement, bans exports, and limits imports, including medical supplies and construction materials. Unemployment hovers around 50 percent, electricity is rationed, and most children have never known freedom.
The Global Theatre
President Trump’s declaration that “nothing will jeopardise the ceasefire” while endorsing Israel’s “right to hit back” exposes the moral contradictions of global diplomacy. The United States presents itself as a peace broker while supplying Israel with weapons that make peace impossible. Europe, too, speaks of international law even as it trades with settlement-based companies and arms the Israeli military. The result is complicity. For Palestinians, the “international community” has become a bitter phrase — a chorus that mourns the dead but funds the killers.
Counting the Cost
Behind the numbers lie human stories. Children who had survived multiple wars, doctors performing surgeries by flashlight, teachers turning bomb shelters into classrooms — all perished or struggled to survive in this latest attack. At the Insan camp, a sanctuary for cancer patients, survivors described a night of terror and despair: “We thought a medical facility would be safe. Now we know that nothing is.”
Amid devastation, Gaza endures. Volunteers dig through rubble with their bare hands. Teachers reopen classrooms in the shadows of ruins. Mothers cook what little food remains for neighbors who have lost everything. Survival itself is resistance.
The Economics of Occupation
Every war leaves Gaza poorer and more dependent. The destruction of infrastructure is systematic: roads, factories, schools, and farms targeted to erase economic independence. The blockade prevents reconstruction, ensuring reliance on international aid, often routed through Israeli checkpoints and banks.
Occupation thus creates a paradox: humanitarian relief sustains the very structures that destroy lives. For Islamic economists, this reveals the moral bankruptcy of a global financial order that profits from misery. Decolonisation, therefore, is not only political — it is economic. Ending occupation requires dismantling systems that convert suffering into commerce and war into industry.
Africa’s Mirror
For Africans, Palestine’s struggle is painfully familiar. From apartheid South Africa to colonial frontiers in Algeria and Kenya, the continent knows what it means to have land stolen, identity erased, and resistance criminalized. African solidarity with Palestine is not sentimentality; it is historical memory. Nelson Mandela captured this truth: “Our freedom is incomplete without the freedom of the Palestinians.”
Economic justice, rooted in ethics, equity, and human dignity, must be the foundation for lasting peace — not only for Palestine but for the Global South as a whole.
What Will It Take?
The question before the world is simple yet profound: Will the ceasefire hold?
History offers little optimism. A truce that leaves occupation intact is a truce built on sand. Peace cannot be sustained by fear or imposed by force. It requires justice — not as rhetoric, but as reality.
For Gaza, justice means an end to siege, reconstruction without interference, accountability for war crimes, and recognition of Palestinian rights. It demands that the world confront its complicity and act beyond rhetoric. Islamic ethical principles remind us that peace (salam) cannot exist without justice (adl), and wealth should serve humanity rather than domination.
Will the Ceasefire Hold?
Not as it stands. A ceasefire can stop bullets, but not the machinery that fires them. It can pause violence, but not the ideology that justifies it. True peace will hold only when Gaza is free, Palestinians are sovereign, and the international community prioritizes justice over geopolitics.
Until then, each ceasefire is not the end of war, but preparation for the next. Yet hope persists — in Gaza’s hospitals, in classrooms rebuilt from rubble, in mothers who refuse despair. The ceasefire will hold only when the world’s conscience does — when justice, not expedience, becomes the guiding principle.
Footnote:
AFRIEF Webinar — “Palestine: Stolen or Decolonised?”
The Africa Islamic Economic Forum (AFRIEF) will host a two-hour virtual webinar exploring the political economy of Palestine, the structures sustaining occupation, and pathways toward decolonisation. Scholars, economists, and policy experts will examine how ethical finance, economic justice, and international solidarity intersect with the struggle for Palestinian sovereignty.
This webinar builds on discussions highlighted in this feature, providing a platform for informed dialogue on justice-oriented economics, human dignity, and the moral imperatives that must guide responses to Gaza’s ongoing crisis.
Baba Yunus Muhammad is the President of the Africa Islamic Economic Forum and a political and economic analyst with a focus on sustainable development, global trade, and Islamic economics. He writes regularly on issues of economic justice, governance, and the intersection of faith and finance
POLITICS
The Economics of Legitimacy: When Power is Stolen, Prosperity is Postponed.
Published
6 days agoon
November 6, 2025By
Editor
Every economy rests on a foundation deeper than currency or trade — it rests on trust. When citizens no longer believe in their leaders, when institutions are captured and laws become elastic, the economy’s moral infrastructure collapses. This is the real cost of Africa’s democratic decay.
Illegitimate power corrodes fiscal discipline. Leaders who rule through manipulation rather than consent spend to survive, not to serve. They inflate bureaucracies, buy loyalty, and mortgage the future for immediate political calm. Public debt balloons, corruption thrives, and the poor — who have no lobby — bear the cost.
The link between governance and growth is now undeniable. The African Development Bank estimates that corruption and mismanagement cost the continent up to $150 billion annually. Countries with transparent elections enjoy three times higher foreign investment and twice the rate of economic diversification. By contrast, states governed by decree or deception face chronic capital flight and social unrest.
For the Islamic economist, legitimacy (sharʿiyyah) is not only a political concept; it is an economic principle. The Qur’an ties justice (ʿadl) to sustenance (rizq): “If the people of the towns had believed and been mindful of God, We would have opened for them blessings from the heavens and the earth.” (Qur’an 7:96).
Where rulers govern through consultation (shūrā) and accountability, nations prosper. Where deceit rules, even natural wealth turns into a curse. The lesson is clear: no budget, bond, or bailout can compensate for the loss of legitimacy.
……….Power Without Expiry Dates: The Continent’s Longest Reigns and the Price of Their Politics
Across Africa, the ballot box is losing its moral weight. Constitutions promise renewal, but power lingers. From Cameroon to Tanzania, the story is the same: elections are held, but accountability is postponed. What emerges is not people’s choice but political endurance — and the longer rulers stay, the weaker their nations grow.
In Cameroon, Paul Biya has ruled since 1982 — a staggering 43 years — recently securing another victory amid boycotts and fraud claims. Yoweri Museveni of Uganda, in power since 1986, continues to suppress dissent and throttle the internet at every poll. Teodoro Obiang Nguema of Equatorial Guinea has outlasted every African Union chairman since 1979, routinely “winning” with over 95% of the vote. In Eritrea, Isaias Afwerki governs without a single national election since independence in 1993.
Others are newer but no less troubling. Alassane Ouattara of Côte d’Ivoire claimed a constitutional “reset” to justify a third term in 2020. Samia Suluhu Hassan of Tanzania returned to power in 2025 with 98% of the vote, following arrests of opposition figures and curbs on the press. In Guinea, Mamadi Doumbouya — the military ruler who once promised civilian rule — has now banned opponents while announcing his own candidacy.
These are not aberrations; they are the architecture of Africa’s political stagnation.
Rigged Votes, Real Losses
Weak governance has an economic signature — and it’s written in red.
The IMF reports that Africa’s average risk premium on sovereign bonds stands at 6.8%, more than double the emerging-market norm. UNCTAD finds foreign investment fell 12% in unstable states since 2019. Youth unemployment averages 33% across the region. Tax systems collect barely 13–15% of GDP, compared to 33% globally. The African Development Bank estimates 5–7% of GDP is lost yearly to corruption and mismanagement.
Where leaders cling to power, capital flees. Where institutions collapse, the poor are left to pay in silence.
Where Ballots Bow to Bayonets
Across the continent, only a handful of nations — Botswana, Mauritius, Cabo Verde — maintain genuinely free and fair elections. Others, like Kenya, Ghana, and Senegal, wobble between progress and regression. The majority now live under systems where democracy is a façade: Tanzania, Uganda, Cameroon, Côte d’Ivoire, Guinea, and Egypt — all red on the Freedom House map, where gavel, crown, and tank replace the ballot box.
The Democracy–Development Disconnect
The numbers expose the paradox: the top 10 authoritarian states have an average per capita income of USD 2,100; the most democratic average USD 6,700.
Over 25 African nations have known one-party or one-man rule for more than a quarter-century.
Only nine have experienced peaceful power transfers in the past decade.
And according to Freedom House (2025), 77% of Africans now live under “partly free” or “not free” regimes.
“No economy can flourish where institutions are hollow, and no democracy can endure where justice is for sale.”
\Justice Is the Currency of Governance
Islamic values offer a forgotten metric of leadership. The Prophet ﷺ ruled through shūrā (consultation), ʿadl (justice), amānah (trust), and maṣlaḥah (the public good). These principles are the “coins” of moral legitimacy — yet today, most regimes rate dangerously low on each. Governance has become transactional, not ethical.
Until Africa restores the moral foundation of its politics, democracy will remain ritual — and economic reform, an illusion.
……..When the Pulpit Falls Silent: Why Africa’s Ulema Must Speak for Justice
Silence is not neutrality. In the Qur’an, the Prophet Shuʿayb was sent to a people whose commerce was unjust; he warned them that cheating the scales invites divine wrath. Today, across much of Africa, our scales — political, economic, moral — are badly tilted. Leaders cling to office through manipulation, youth lose faith in ballots, and public wealth is consumed by private greed.
This is not merely a political failure; it is a spiritual one. The Qur’an commands: “O you who believe, stand firmly for justice, witnesses for Allah, even if against yourselves or your kin.” (4:135). If the faithful will not hold rulers accountable, who will?
Africa’s mosques and religious institutions wield enormous moral authority. They educate, they counsel, they comfort — but too often, they retreat from confronting injustice for fear of politics. Yet the Prophet ﷺ said: “The greatest jihad is to speak a word of truth before a tyrant ruler.” Silence before oppression is not prudence; it is complicity.
Imams, scholars, and Islamic economists can champion reform without partisanship. They can preach about stewardship (amānah), integrity in public service, and the sin of corruption. They can organise civic literacy workshops that teach believers their constitutional rights and responsibilities. They can remind the wealthy and powerful that every dinar taken unjustly will be accounted for before Allah.
Africa does not lack constitutions; it lacks conscience. When mosques become centres of justice education, when the faithful demand accountability as a religious duty, when economic policy is shaped by moral restraint — then democracy will cease to be a ritual and become a trust once more.
POLITICS
Samia Suluhu Hassan: Power, Pragmatism — and a Presidency Under Strain
Published
6 days agoon
November 6, 2025By
Editor
Baba Yunus Muhammad
When Samia Suluhu Hassan assumed Tanzania’s presidency in 2021, she arrived on a tide of cautious optimism. The sudden death of her predecessor, John Magufuli, had left the country in shock and uncertainty. Samia’s calm tone and early conciliatory gestures—restoring international ties, meeting opposition leaders, reopening dialogue with donors—were widely read as signs of a gentler, more pragmatic leadership. Yet four years later, that optimism has largely faded.
The October 2025 election cemented her power in dramatic fashion: an official landslide, nearly 98 percent of the vote, granting her and the ruling Chama Cha Mapinduzi (CCM) an overwhelming mandate. But it was a victory shadowed by suppression and fear. Opposition figures were disqualified or detained, campaign events broken up by security forces, and independent media throttled by new restrictions. When results were announced, protests erupted in Dar es Salaam, Mwanza, and Arusha. Police responded with curfews and force. Several deaths were reported.
The government insists it acted to preserve peace. Critics see the episode as proof that Tanzania’s democracy—once a regional example of quiet stability—has sunk into managed authoritarianism. The overwhelming vote margin, many observers argue, speaks less to popularity than to the absence of any genuine competition.
It is an irony of power: the leader once cast as healer now presides over an anxious nation. The ruling CCM, in office since independence, remains a formidable political machine. Its networks reach into nearly every district, its control of state resources entrenched through decades of incumbency. Samia’s presidency, in this sense, has deepened a long Tanzanian tradition—order without openness.
On the economic front, the picture is no less complex. Tanzania’s GDP growth has remained robust by regional standards, powered by construction, mining, services, and agriculture. Inflation is moderate, and the debt ratio comparatively healthy. Yet beneath these steady macro indicators lies a story of structural fragility. The country’s tax base is too narrow to sustain ambitious spending; vast public projects have piled up commitments without always yielding productivity gains. Youth unemployment is rising, rural inequality widening, and climate pressures increasingly threaten agriculture—the livelihood of most Tanzanians.
Multilateral institutions have praised Samia’s investment drive but warn that without deep revenue reform and stronger governance, Tanzania risks “growing without transforming.” Much of the growth remains urban and capital-intensive, leaving a restless young population excluded from its rewards. The president’s Vision 2050 blueprint—meant to drive industrialization and self-reliance—faces the same fiscal dilemma as similar plans before it: too few domestic resources, and too little political transparency to ensure that what’s spent is spent well.
The political climate only compounds those concerns. Human-rights organizations describe an expanding list of violations: arbitrary arrests, restrictions on assembly, forced evictions linked to development projects, and intimidation of journalists. In many regions, opposition rallies can only proceed under heavy surveillance, if at all. To international partners, Samia’s government projects a narrative of discipline and sovereignty; to her critics, it is a system increasingly allergic to dissent.
For ordinary Tanzanians, these dynamics are not abstract. Economic frustration meets shrinking civic space in dangerous ways. Farmers displaced from ancestral land, students struggling for jobs, and activists facing arrest—each is a symptom of a deeper imbalance between growth and justice. The protests that followed the 2025 election were not merely about votes, but about a sense that the system listens less and commands more.
Still, Samia remains a formidable political force. She has built her authority within CCM through a mix of pragmatism and patronage, consolidating the party’s factions and cultivating an image of motherly resolve. Her soft-spoken manner belies a leader keenly aware of power’s machinery and the price of control. In that respect, she has not betrayed her predecessor’s legacy so much as refined it—turning Magufuli’s confrontational nationalism into a more polished, internationally palatable form of dominance.
Tanzania’s future now stands at a delicate crossroads. One scenario envisions continued growth under tight political control—orderly, predictable, and perhaps efficient in the short term, but brittle in the long run. Another imagines a gradual opening, where the government restores civic freedoms and empowers institutions to check excess. The third, darker path would be escalation: more protests, harsher crackdowns, and international isolation that unravels the country’s economic promise.
The choice, ultimately, rests with the same woman who came to power preaching unity. Samia Suluhu Hassan governs a nation that still believes in its potential—a nation young, resource-rich, and eager for dignity. Whether she leads it toward inclusive prosperity or entrenched control will define not just her presidency, but Tanzania’s next chapter in history.
About the Author:
Baba Yunus Muhammad is the President of the Africa Islamic Economic Forum and a seasoned political analyst focusing on governance, democracy, and socio-economic transformation across Africa. He writes extensively on the intersection of faith, leadership, and political reform on the continent. His work bridges politics, economics, and moral philosophy, highlighting how governance and ethics shape development outcomes across the continent. babayunus@icloud.com
The Halal Economy: Unlocking Africa’s Ethical and Inclusive Growth
Ceasefire or Cycle? Gaza and the Politics of a Manufactured Peace
Palestine: Stolen or Decolonised?
Topics
- AGRIBUSINESS & AGRICULTURE
- BUSINESS & ECONOMY
- CULTURE
- DIGITAL ECONOMY & TECHNOLOGY
- EDITORIAL
- ENERGY
- EVENTS & ANNOUNCEMENTS
- HEALTH & EDUCATION
- IN CASE YOU MISSED IT
- ISLAMIC ECONOMY
- ISLAMIC FINANCE & CAPITAL MARKETS
- KNOWLEDGE CENTRE, CULTURE & INTERVIEWS
- OBITUARY
- OPINION
- POLITICS
- PROFILE
- PUBLICATIONS
- REPORTS
- SPECIAL FEATURES/ECONOMIC FOOTPRINTS
- SPECIAL REPORTS
- SUSTAINABILITY & CLIMATE CHANGE
- THIS WEEK'S TOP STORIES
- TRENDING
- UNCATEGORIZED
- UNITED NATIONS SDGS
Trending
-
ISLAMIC ECONOMY5 days agoIslamic Banking Sector Expected to Reach $7.5tn by 2028
-
POLITICS6 days agoSamia Suluhu Hassan: Power, Pragmatism — and a Presidency Under Strain
-
ISLAMIC FINANCE & CAPITAL MARKETS5 days agoWhy Collaboration Is Key to Unlocking the Future of Islamic Finance?
-
ISLAMIC ECONOMY5 days agoHalal Economy Unlocks Trillion-Dollar Growth for Nigeria
-
EDITORIAL6 days agoWhy Africa’s Ballot Box Betrayal Hurts Its People — and Its Economics
-
REPORTS5 days agoEconomics and Madnes
-
ISLAMIC FINANCE & CAPITAL MARKETS1 day agoDoes Blockchain Technology Have Value for Islamic Finance?
-
SUSTAINABILITY & CLIMATE CHANGE5 days agoIslamic Development Bank Invests $1.15 Billion in Kazakhstan Water Sector
