Social media platforms like WhatsApp, Instagram, Facebook and X have transformed political dialogue and activism in Tanzania. The democratisation of political expression has especially empowered young voters and activists to challenge government actions and champion causes such as human rights, the release of political prisoners, and electoral reforms.
This is significant in a country politically dominated by one ruling party since independence in 1961. The government has responded by frequently clamping down on social media through arrests, mass content removals and platform-specific shutdowns. This is in addition to direct controls over media outlets. Media and communication scholar Leah Mwainyekule examines Tanzania’s social media landscape ahead of elections in October 2025.
What is the history of Tanzania’s social media curbs?
Tanzania’s political system is dominated by the Chama Cha Mapinduzi (CCM) party, which has held power continuously since independence in 1961. The ruling party has kept in place a political structure headed by a powerful president in a tightly controlled political space. Opposition parties have faced suppression marked by restrictions on rallies, arrests, violence and exclusion from electoral processes. This worsened under former president John Magufuli, who clamped down on political dissent, persecuted opposition figures and imposed legal curbs against media and civic debate.
While President Samia Suluhu Hassan has recently introduced moderate reforms – restoring some rights, easing bans and facilitating dialogue – opposition leaders still confront severe charges or incarceration. The main opposition party – Chama cha Demokrasia na Maendeleo (Chadema) – still can’t contest major elections.
Tanzania’s social media curbs are embedded in this political environment. The government claims to be controlling digital content to maintain political and social stability. This strategy is often justified by concerns about national security, misinformation and public order.
Laws and regulations govern the digital space. The landmark legislation is the Cybercrimes Act of 2015, which introduced provisions about online activities.
* It’s illegal to share or receive unauthorised information, even if truthful or publicly available.
* Police have extensive powers to conduct searches and seizures.
* Secret surveillance and interception of communications can happen without judicial authorisation or proper due process.
The law has been condemned for provisions which limit political expression through blogs, online media and mobile platforms like WhatsApp. People have been arrested for criticising government officials or the president on WhatsApp and Facebook.
Further controls relate to obligations for internet service providers, social media platform owners, and expanded categories of prohibited content. They are contained in another law which was amended in 2025.
Critics highlight provisions that undermine online anonymity. Internet service providers and online content service providers have to be able to identify the source of online content. Internet café operators are required to register users through recognised IDs, assign static IP addresses, and install cameras to monitor users’ activities.
The laws are vague about defining what’s not allowed. It might be:
* content which “offends individuals or groups”
* sharing “evil content”
* promoting material “likely to mislead or deceive the public”.
The lack of clear guidelines enables officials to target critics or unwanted content as they please.
Finally, critics have pointed to unrealistic deadlines for content removal. The 2018 regulations said platforms must remove prohibited content within 12 hours of notification. The 2020 update reduced this deadline to just two hours. This made it one of the most stringent requirements globally.
The two-hour removal window applies mainly to content flagged by the Tanzania Communications Regulatory Authority. But it could also relate to complaints from affected users. Platforms must also suspend or terminate accounts of users who fail to remove prohibited content within this period. This short deadline makes it nearly impossible to check whether content is legal before removal.
These regulations are widely perceived as politically motivated. They appear designed to suppress government critics, media and opposition voices. They stifle legitimate public discourse.
What are the government’s most recent actions?
The most recent example is the government’s suspension of the country’s most popular online forum, Jamii Forums, for 90 days in September 2025. The government cited the publication of content that “misleads the public”, “defames” the president and undermines national unity.
The government has also resorted to blanket bans of platforms like X (formerly Twitter). The most recent followed the hacking of official police accounts in a cyber attack. Although some users access X through virtual private networks, the ban remains officially enforced by internet service providers across the country.
The timing of the shutdown echoes similar action in 2020 in the run-up to the previous general election.
Tools to bypass national network restrictions are illegal and punishable by law.
Traditional media such as radio, television and newspapers face growing government censorship and surveillance pressure.
What is the effect on social and political debates?
Tanzania is set for general elections on 29 October 2025. The restrictions on social media will doubtless be felt. The restrictions reduce the platforms available for open discussion of government policies, political ideas and election choices. This shrinking digital space undermines public participation and limits access to diverse viewpoints critical for democratic debate.
Social media also play another important role. Social media users are known to expose electoral fraud, misinformation and government misconduct.
The scales are tilted against dissent, opposition narratives and minority voices.
At the same time, misinformation and hate speech may grow. This can increase the risks of polarisation and identity-based tensions.
What is the effect of governance?
The expanding restrictions reflect a governance model favouring information control over transparency and accountability. This can normalise censorship, arbitrary detentions and media suppression.
In essence, Tanzania’s social media curbs are likely to weaken governance. They undermine transparency, increase tension, and erode public trust, limiting democratic accountability.
Leah Mwainyekule does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
By Leah Mwainyekule, Lecturer, University of Westminster
Read more on Modern Ghana Media Communication Ltd.
