A Tanzanian civil society organisation has filed a legal challenge seeking to restrict the government’s ability to impose internet shutdowns, arguing that blanket disruptions to online access violate constitutional rights and lack adequate legal safeguards.

The case has been brought by the Legal and Human Rights Centre (LHRC), a Dar es Salaam–based rights watchdog, which is asking the courts to rule that the state cannot suspend or throttle internet services without clear legal limits and judicial oversight.

The challenge follows repeated incidents in which authorities have reportedly disrupted online services during protests, examinations and politically sensitive periods. LHRC argues that existing powers allowing such measures are overly broad, insufficiently defined and open to abuse.

The case has been filed at the East African Court of Justice (EACJ). LHRC argues that internet shutdowns breach regional obligations under the Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community, including commitments to the rule of law, good governance and the protection of fundamental rights.

According to court filings cited by regional media, the group also challenges the domestic legal basis typically cited for disruptions, including provisions of Tanzania’s Electronic and Postal Communications Act and related regulations. LHRC says these frameworks grant regulators and security agencies wide discretion without clear thresholds, time limits or requirements for judicial authorisation.

Mobile internet plays a central role in Tanzania’s daily life, supporting commerce, digital payments, education, healthcare access and communication. LHRC argues that shutdowns can rapidly disrupt business activity, stall transactions and disconnect communities, with disproportionate effects on small enterprises and informal workers.

The applicants are seeking declaratory relief that blanket shutdowns and network throttling are unlawful unless narrowly tailored, time-bound and subject to independent oversight. They are also calling for greater transparency, including public notice and justification whenever connectivity restrictions are imposed.

The case reflects a wider regional trend. Across Africa, governments have increasingly used internet restrictions during elections, protests and security operations, drawing criticism from rights organisations and international bodies concerned about democratic norms and rule-of-law protections.

Comparable cases in Kenya and Uganda have produced mixed outcomes, while UN special rapporteurs have repeatedly stated that internet shutdowns should be a last resort under international human rights law.

A ruling in favour of LHRC could establish judicial limits on executive authority over digital infrastructure in Tanzania and potentially influence practice across East African Community member states. An adverse decision would reinforce the government’s discretion to restrict connectivity on security or public order grounds.