Tanzania

The Constitution of the United Republic of Tanzania was promulgated in 1977 and since then there have been 14 constitutional amendments with the last amendment having been made in 2011. AI, being a relatively recent development, therefore has not been addressed under the Constitution as a specific subject. However, there are provisions within the Constitution that are relevant to AI; namely:

• Privacy rights. Article 16 of the Constitution provides for the right to privacy and personal security. According to the Constitution, every person is entitled to respect and protection of his person, the privacy of his own person, his family and of his matrimonial life, and respect and protection of his residence and private communications. For the purpose of preserving the person’s right to privacy and personal security, the state authority is obliged by the Constitution to lay down legal procedures regarding the circumstances, manner and extent to which the right to privacy, security of his person, his property and residence may be encroached upon without prejudice. The Constitution underpins the Personal Data Protection Act of 2022, which is a key piece of legislation for AI in Tanzania. Section 36 of this Act specifically governs automated data processing, ensuring that AI-driven decision-making processes do not compromise personal privacy and data security.
• Equality before the law. Article 13(1) of the Constitution states that “All persons are equal before the law”. This principle is relevant to AI as it requires that AI systems used in governance and public service delivery must be free from bias and align with constitutional protections of citizen rights.
• Right to information. The Constitution does not directly provide for the right of access to information. But this right is implied under Article 29(1) of the Constitution which states that “Every person in the United Republic has the right to enjoy fundamental human rights”. The Constitution, as the mother law, underpins the Access to Information Act, 2016. This is important for ensuring transparency and accountability in the use of AI in public authorities.
• Legislative power. Under Article 64, the Constitution vests legislative powers to Parliament. The Parliament enacts laws, which provide the legal mechanism for creating specific AI legislation in the future.

Some of the recent court human rights decisions include:

• First PDPC Decision (2025): Ruled that children’s images are sensitive data, finding commercial use without parental consent unlawful and affirming the right to erasure, issuing fines and damages.
• Safari Automotive Ltd v. Godwin Danda (2025)(High Court): Established that recording and posting a person’s video online without consent violates fundamental privacy rights, setting a precedent for image rights litigation under Article 16.
• Tanzania has ratified several international human rights conventions relevant to AI including:
  • Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 1948
  • Convention on the Rights of the Child, 1989
  • The Benne Convention for Protection of Literary and Artistic Works, 1886;
  • The Universal Copyrights Convention, 1951;
  • The Agreement on Trade-related Aspects of the Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPs) Agreement
  • International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, 1966

Under Tanzanian law, patent rights are part of intellectual property rights dealing with the protection of inventions, either of products or processes. Invention under the Tanzanian law means “a solution to a specific problem in the field of technology”. Patents are administered by the Business Registration and Licensing Agency (BRELA). For an invention to be patentable it must be “new, involve an inventive step and is capable of industrial application”. A registered patent gives the proprietor exclusive monopoly rights of up to 20 years, renewable twice for a period of five years each.

The Copyright and Neighbouring Act, 1999 (the Act) defines copyright under section 4 as “the sole legal right to print, publish, perform, film or record a literary, artistic or musical work”. Copyright protection applies to original works from the moment of their creation. This includes:

• Literary works: Books, pamphlets, computer programs, lectures, and sermons.
• Artistic works: Drawings, paintings, architecture, sculpture, and photography.
• Musical and audiovisual: Vocal or instrumental music, films, and cinematographic works.
• Derivative works: Translations, adaptations, and arrangements.

Trade secrets and confidentiality are concerned with the protection of proprietary information owned by an entity or an individual, such as customer profiles, financial arrangements, internal management practices, manual and market survey information. Trade secrets under the Tanzanian jurisdiction can be protected through various ways, including entering into a non-disclosure agreement (NDA) or incorporating a confidentiality clause in an agreement.

Based on recent legal developments, the leading intellectual property (IP) cases in Tanzania have centred on the enforcement of well-known trademarks, the limits of regional (ARIPO) registrations, and copyright protection for traditional designs.

• JC Decaux SA and JC Decaux Tanzania Limited v. JP Decaux Tanzania Limited (2021/2022). This landmark case in the High Court (Commercial Division) was the first to strongly protect a well-known international trademark against a locally registered, infringing company name. The decision established a precedent for protecting foreign-based, widely recognised brands from local “free-riding” or “passing off”.
• Lakairo Industries Group Co. Ltd vs. Kenafrica Industries Ltd (2025).The Court of Appeal of Tanzania (CAT) ruled that trademarks registered through the African Regional Intellectual Property Organization (ARIPO) under the Banjul Protocol are not enforceable in Tanzania unless they are specifically registered locally. This case (Civil Appeal No. 593 of 2022) established that the territoriality principle prevails, and ARIPO registrations do not automatically confer protection in Tanzania.
• Tanzania-China Friendship Textile Company Ltd v. Nida Textile Mills (T) Ltd (2024).This case focused on copyright infringement regarding “khanga” and “vitenge” designs. The court held that registration with the Copyright Society of Tanzania (COSOTA) is sufficient to prove ownership of artistic works. The case clarified that for copyright, the owner must prove the work is original and that “works for hire” (created by employees) belong to the employer.
• RSA Ltd v. Hanspaul Automech Ltd & Another (HC-Comm. Case No. 160 of 2014).A crucial case regarding the requirement for originality in copyright, establishing that the plaintiff must prove they are the creator in the “real sense”. 

The PDPA is the main legal instrument in Tanzania governing the treatment of data. The PDPA’s main objectives include:

• regulating the collection and processing of personal data;
• ensuring that the collection and processing of personal data of a data subject is guided by the specified principles;
• protecting the privacy of individuals;
• establishing a legal and institutional mechanism to protect personal data; and
• providing data subjects with rights and remedies for violation of the PDPA provisions.

The PDPA sets out several principles under section 5. The principles require that a data controller or data processor must ensure that personal data is:

• processed lawfully, fairly and transparently;
• collected for explicit, specified and legitimate purposes and not further processing in a manner incompatible with those purposes;
• adequate, relevant and limited to what is necessary in relation to the purposes for which it is processed;
• accurate and where necessary, kept up to date, with every reasonable step taken to ensure that any inaccurate personal data is erased or rectified without delay;
• stored in a form which permits identification of data subjects for no longer than is necessary for the purposes for which the personal data is processed;
• processed in accordance with the rights of a data subject;
• processed in a manner that ensures appropriate security of the personal data, including protection against unauthorised or unlawful processing and against any loss, destruction or damage, using appropriate technical or organisational measures; and
• not transferred abroad contrary to the provisions of the PDPA.

The PDPA prohibits a person from collecting or processing personal data without being registered as a data controller or processor (section 14). The registration is to be done with the personal data protection commission (the Commission) under section 14(2).

The data controller shall collect data only if it is for a lawful purpose and or collection is necessary or incidental to a lawful purpose as per section 22(2). The data controller to collect personal data directly from a data subject concerned pursuant to section 23(1).

Under section 23(3) of the PDPA, a data controller is not obliged to collect personal data directly from the data subject concerned where:

• the personal data is publicly available;
• the data subject concerned authorises the collection of the personal data from a third party;
• compliance is not reasonably practicable in the circumstances of the particular case;
• non-compliance is necessary for compliance with other written laws; or
• compliance would prejudice the lawful purpose of the collection.

Under the PDPA, biometric data is recognised as sensitive personal data (section 3(f)). However, the law does not specify what biometric data comprises of. The law clearly prohibits processing of sensitive personal data without obtaining prior written consent of the data subject (section 30(1)). The consent given under section 30(1) may be withdrawn by the data subject at any time and without any explanation or charges.

The consent required under section 30(1) shall not be required where:

• the processing is necessary for compliance with other written laws;
• the processing is necessary to protect the vital interests of the data subject or of another person, where the data subject is incapable of giving their consent or is not represented by their legal representative;
• the processing is necessary for the institution, trial or defence of legal claims;
• the processing relates to personal data which has apparently been made public by the data subject;
• the processing is necessary for the purposes of scientific research and the Commission has, by special guidelines, specified the circumstances under which such processing may be carried out; or
• the processing is necessary for the purposes of medical reasons in the interest of the data.

The Bill of Rights, which is an integral part of Tanzania’s Constitution, provides for anti-discrimination and the right to equality. Among the fundamental policy objectives of the Constitution is to ensure that all forms of discrimination, among others are eradicated (Article 9(h)). Under Article 12(1), the Constitution provides that all human beings are born free and equal. Furthermore, Article 13(1) of the Constitution provides that all persons are equal before the law and are entitled, without discrimination, to protection and equality before the law.

The Constitutional provisions on anti-discrimination and equality are transposed into following national laws:

• Employment and Labour Relations Act, 2004.Section 7 prohibits discrimination, including harassment, in any employment policy or practice. Employers must implement a plan to promote equal opportunity.
• Persons with Disabilities Act, 2010.Provides specific protections for persons with disabilities regarding healthcare, employment, and social support.
• Labour Institutions Act (Guidelines).Provides rules for non-discrimination at the workplace. 

Domestic technology infrastructure in Tanzania is undergoing rapid modernisation, focusing on strengthening the National ICT Broadband Backbone (NICTBB) to support 3G, 4G, and 5G networks, alongside robust e-Government, cybersecurity, and cloud-based services. Key requirements include adhering to standards for data centres, high-speed fibre connectivity, secure data storage, and integrating AI in key sectors.

Key domestic infrastructure requirements include:

• Data centres and storage. Development of standardised data centres to ensure secure, efficient, and reliable data storage is critical, adhering to national ICT standards for government and public-sector institutions.
• e-Government infrastructure. The government mandates the use of specific infrastructure, including the Government Electronic Payment Gateway (GEPG) and centralised systems for SMS, email, and web services, aiming to improve efficiency.
• Standardised cabling. Adherence to Tanzania Standard (DTZS) for generic cabling in customer premises is required for building systems.

No observation.

The Fair Competition Act, Chapter 285 (Revised Edition of 2023 of Tanzanian laws) promotes and protects effective competition in trade and commerce, protects consumers from unfair and misleading market conduct, and provides for other related matters.

Key provisions include:

• Prohibition of anti-competitive agreements. The Act prohibits agreements that restrict competition, including price-fixing, market sharing, and collusive tendering (section 8).
• Abuse of dominance. It restricts firms with significant market power from engaging in conduct that harms competition or consumers. According to section 10(1) a person with a dominant position in a market shall not use his position of dominance if the object, effect or likely effect of the conduct is to appreciably prevent, restrict or distort competition.
• Merger control and approvals. A merger is prohibited if it creates or strengthens a position of dominance in a market and where mergers and acquisitions exceeding specific thresholds must be reported to and approved by the Fair Competition Commission (FCC) pursuant to section 11(2).
• Regulatory enforcement. The Act establishes the FCC to enforce competition rules and the Fair Competition Tribunal (FCT) to handle appeals.

The Tanzanian law does not recognise AI agents as having any form of legal personality, capacity to enter contracts or ability to act on behalf of principals. Even the protection of rights under the Constitution, pertains to persons, and AI is neither a legal nor natural person.

As stated in Section 7.1, above, there is no industry-specific rules for autonomous AI agents, but AI technologies are adopted across sectors in Tanzania including:

• Health Sector. There is a Policy Framework for the Health Sector (2022) which provides for a structured approach to integrating AI in the health sector and outlines essential processes and technologies and stakeholders’ roles to enhance AI. The National Digital Health Strategy (2019–2024) underscores the need for streamlining healthcare services delivery and improving efficiency.
• Education sector. The National Digital Education Guideline for AI in Education (2025), provides a roadmap for AI integration in teaching and learning.
• Agriculture. The Tanzania Agricultural Development Strategy acknowledges the role of AI in advancing agritech solutions such as monitoring crops with drones, weather prediction models and automated livestock management system.
• Finance sector. The Bank of Tanzania’s FinTech Regulatory Sandbox is an initiative that seeks to foster innovation by allowing financial services providers and FinTech companies to test AI-driven financial product and services, with the purpose of enhancing financial inclusion and efficiency.

AI-related product liability is governed by a fragmented framework of existing laws, which are being applied to handle issues such as algorithmic errors, data breaches, and malfunctioning AI systems.

While traditional law often requires proof of fault, the complexity of AI (e.g. “black box” algorithms) makes establishing negligence challenging. Emerging interpretations in Tanzania suggest that if a product is “defective” and causes harm, manufacturers may face strict liability. If an AI system acts autonomously, determining whether the liability lies with the AI developer (design defect) or the user (misuse) is a key area of legal debate in Tanzania.

No observation.

There are no cases that have been lodged concerning AI-related claims, but the key trends show rising risks around AI-driven fraud, deepfakes, copyright infringement, and algorithmic bias. Emerging trends focus on developing a national AI strategy, implementing regulatory sandboxes for FinTech, and addressing data privacy in AI training.

Tanzania does not have enacted AI legislation, nor are there any proposed AI legislative Bills in the offing. At the national level, there is a National AI Strategy and Ethical Guidelines, 2025, whose main purpose is to strike a balance between innovation, ethics, privacy and human rights. An AI policy is currently in the offing, and perhaps, following its promulgation, AI legislation will follow as a matter of course.

There is no single AI implementation; rather, there are segmented sector-related AI strategies, as discussed in Sections 7.2 and 9.1, above. There is also the Tanzania Digital Economy Strategic Framework (2024–2034) which envisions a transition to a fully digital economy, with AI as the core enabler.