.gif)
Adeladius Makwega – MBAGALA
“Advocates must respect the procedures of the Court. They should not use the media to interfere with or influence the conduct of a matter before the Court. Communication concerning a case must be carried out in accordance with the Constitution, the law, the professional code of conduct for advocates and the directions of the Court. The Court reminds all concerned that proceedings must continue in a manner that ensures justice and the integrity of the judicial process.”
These are some of the contents of a statement issued by the Judiciary of Tanzania on 12 August 2026 concerning the conduct of advocates in their communication with the media.
The statement also refers to Government Notice No. 118 of 2018, as well as Article 30(1)(2)(d) of the Constitution of the United Republic of Tanzania.
When Mwanakwetu read this statement, he did not rush to condemn it. He sat down and asked himself several questions—questions which he believes can help strengthen our Judiciary and improve the way this important institution communicates with the public.
My goodness! If the intention of the issuer of the statement was to guide advocates regarding their conduct before the media, the first question naturally arises: Why did the Judiciary choose to issue a public statement instead of communicating directly with the group it was addressing—namely, advocates?
This is not a question intended to ridicule anyone. It is a question about the best way to use the communication systems available within the Judiciary.
For an ordinary Tanzanian, references such as Government Notice No. 118 of 2018 and Article 30(1)(2)(d) of the Constitution are not matters they encounter every day. An ordinary citizen who sees such a statement may ask:What does Government Gazette No. 118 of 2018 say? What does this particular Article of the Constitution concern? And how does it relate to this matter?
To find the answers, the citizen would have to look for those documents, read them and try to understand them.
This is where Mwanakwetu believes there is an important question regarding how information is presented to its intended audience and to the public.
The Judiciary of Tanzania already has various communication systems for engaging its stakeholders, including the e-Wakili system.
If the message is directed specifically at advocates, why should they not receive those instructions through official channels that reach them directly?
For example, if the Judiciary wants to tell:
“All advocates and other stakeholders of the Judiciary...”
it can use its official systems to deliver that message directly to its intended recipients.Then, if there is a reason for informing the general public, a separate public statement can be issued in a manner that explains the matter and its importance to ordinary citizens.
This brings us to another question:Is this a statement for advocates or for the general public? If the Judiciary considered the matter to be of wider public interest, then making it known to citizens may have a legitimate purpose.
But if the principal target is advocates, Mwanakwetu asks:Why should the information not first be communicated directly to advocates?
And beyond that:
Could publishing such a statement to the general public be interpreted differently by citizens who have absolutely nothing to do with the cases before the Courts?
Let us not forget that the Judiciary does not exist for advocates alone.
It is a place where citizens go to attend cases involving their relatives, give evidence, pursue their rights or seek legal services.Therefore, every word that comes from this institution can create a particular perception within society.
Why should the Registrar not use official communication channels with advocates?
Here Mwanakwetu raises another administrative question:
If advocates are the intended recipients, why should the message not be sent directly through the official communication channels that already exist between the Judiciary and advocates?
And if there was a need for the information to reach the public, why should the Judiciary’s Communication Unit not have been involved in preparing it as an official public communication?
This is not about looking for someone to blame.It is about using every professional in their area of expertise.
Mwanakwetu believes that an institution as large as the Judiciary cannot lack professionals. If there are officers who are trained and experienced in public communication, writing institutional statements, public relations and information management, it is only sensible that their professional expertise should be properly utilised.The Registrar has his or her responsibilities.The Judge has his or her responsibilities.The Magistrate has his or her responsibilities.
The Accountant has his or her responsibilities.The Procurement Officer has his or her responsibilities.And the Communications Officer has his or her responsibilities.
That is what it means to use human resources efficiently.
Mwanakwetu asks:
“Or once you are within the walls of the Judiciary, are the Judge and Magistrate also the accountant, Procurement Officer, Communications Officer—in other words, everything?”
Absolutely not!
Every professional should be given the opportunity to apply their expertise.This is not a small matter if we want a strong Judiciary.
Someone may ask:
“Mwanakwetu, why are you making such a big issue out of just one statement?”
Mwanakwetu's answer is simple:
Because institutions are built through the small things that are done every day.
The Judiciary is respected not merely because of its buildings. It is also respected because of how it receives cases, how it conducts proceedings, how it communicates with citizens, how it communicates with its stakeholders and how it utilises its professionals.Today, Tanzania is undergoing major reforms in the Judiciary.
We are witnessing the construction of buildings, improvements in services and significant investment in judicial infrastructure. A substantial portion of those funds comes from national resources and loans which, ultimately, the nation is responsible for repaying.
Therefore, citizens have the right to look not only at the buildings, but also at the performance of the institution operating inside those buildings.Let us not misunderstand Mwanakwetu.
Mwanakwetu is not saying that the Judiciary should stop communicating with the public.
Quite the opposite.The Judiciary should have even better communication with the people.
But what he is asking is:Who should prepare the statement?Who should receive it?Through which channel should it be delivered?In what language should it be written?And at what time should it be issued?These are fundamental questions for any institution that serves the public.Mwanakwetu also asks that one thing be clearly understood.
When journalists go to the Courts, they do not go there because they enjoy walking around Court buildings.
They do not go there because they enjoy stepping into Courtrooms.
Absolutely not!They go because there is a matter of public interest that needs to be reported.There are many citizens who cannot get to Court.There are relatives waiting to know what is happening.There are citizens who want to understand how justice is being administered.
Therefore, when a journalist goes to Court, he or she often carries the responsibility of taking information from the Court to citizens who could not be there themselves. An advocate may speak to the media because society has a thirst for information.
If the issue is that certain rules should be removed and that judges and magistrates should be allowed to speak more freely with society, then Mwanakwetu asks:
Why should society—the owner and beneficiary of public institutions—be placed behind a barrier when it comes to information?
Creating barriers between the Judiciary and society may cause citizens to lose confidence in the institution. It may even contribute to public perceptions that the Judiciary is distant from the people it is meant to serve.
That is why the Judiciary and the media need to build a professional relationship based on respect, trust and brotherhood.
If our relationship is one of brotherhood, why should we put barriers between ourselves when it comes to information?
Mwanakwetu believes that the Judiciary of Tanzania should continue building friendship, good neighbourliness and goodwill with the people.The respect of the Judiciary is not built through the silence of citizens.
It is built when citizens understand what is happening, trust that justice is being done and see that their institution respects them.
Therefore, every statement issued by the Judiciary should be an opportunity to build trust, not to create fear. And every professional within the Judiciary should be given the opportunity to use his or her expertise for the benefit of the institution.
Mwanakwetu believes that if the Judiciary’s Department/Unit of Communications is fully involved in statements intended for the public, the language used can be more accessible and friendly to citizens without reducing the authority or seriousness of the Judiciary.
These Communications Officers have studied their profession.
Journalists have studied theirs.They are professionals who understand one another.
They are colleagues, they are brothers and sisters in the communication profession, and they can communicate effectively with one another.
This is not an attack on the Judiciary.Journalists are not criminals.
It is a constructive question.It is a question from a citizen who wants to see the Judiciary of Tanzania remain strong, respected, transparent and maintain a good relationship with citizens and the media.
Mwanakwetu believes that a strong Judiciary is built not only through laws and buildings, but also through professional communication, transparency and respect for citizens.If advocates are the intended recipients, let them be reached through channels that directly concern them.
And if the public needs to know, let the information be provided in language that citizens can understand and with the involvement of communication professionals.
Let us respect the Judiciary, but let us also respectfully question it and build it together.
Otherwise, we risk destroying the very institution we seek to strengthen.
Mwanakwetu, are you there? Remember.
“The Registrar is the Registrar, the Communications Officer is the Communications Officer: Let Professionals Be Used Appropriately
I wish you a good day.
makwadeladius@gmail.com
0717649257
.gif)
Post a Comment