High Court Orders State to Assign Lawyers to Besigye

Updated by Faith Barbara N Ruhinda

The High Court has ruled that the treason trial of veteran opposition politician Dr Kizza Besigye and his co-accused will proceed even if they are not represented by lawyers of their choice, directing that legal counsel be assigned under the State Brief Scheme where necessary.

Justice Emmanuel Baguma delivered the ruling after Besigye, who appeared alongside Hajj Obeid Lutale and Capt Denis Oola, objected to the proceedings continuing in the absence of their preferred lawyers.
Besigye told the court that he had been brought from Luzira Prison against his will and had declined to participate in the hearing because he had been denied access to legal representation of his choice.

The three are facing treason charges over allegations that they conspired to overthrow the Ugandan government by soliciting funding, acquiring weapons and organising paramilitary activities through meetings allegedly held in Kampala, Nairobi, Geneva and Athens.

At the start of the hearing, Assistant Director of Public Prosecutions Thomas Jatiko told the court that the prosecution was ready to proceed despite the absence of the defence team, noting that all prosecution witnesses were present.

Besigye argued that continuing with the trial without his preferred lawyers, Erias Lukwago and Martha Karua, would violate his constitutional right to a fair hearing.

He told the court that Lukwago had been tortured, with images of the alleged assault circulating on social media, while Karua had been deported to Kenya, leaving the accused without their chosen legal representatives.

When Justice Baguma asked whether anyone had expressly denied them the right to legal representation of their choice, Besigye responded that the matter was already the subject of a pending application before the High Court.

Justice Baguma nevertheless ruled that the case could proceed, holding that if the accused were unable to secure representation by their preferred lawyers, the court would assign counsel under the State Brief Scheme to ensure the trial continues.

Besigye further told the court that although prison authorities had previously been directed to allow his lawyers access to Luzira Prison, they had never been permitted to jointly review the prosecution’s evidence with him.

He also said certified copies of proceedings in both the treason case and a related application on legal representation had not been provided despite repeated requests.
The veteran opposition leader attempted to raise concerns over recent remarks by President Yoweri Museveni, whom he said had publicly accused him of delaying his own trial by rejecting what the President described as “community justice” or indigenous justice mechanisms.

Justice Emmanuel Baguma declined to consider the submissions, ruling that the President’s remarks were not relevant to the matter before the court.

Besigye further alleged that a letter he wrote from Luzira Prison on Friday outlining his concerns had not reached the court because it had been withheld by prison authorities.

Assistant Superintendent of Prisons Emmanuel Hiire told the court he could not confirm whether the letter had been cleared for delivery.

Capt Denis Oola also objected to the hearing proceeding, saying he was only informed at about 9:00 a.m. on Monday that the case had been scheduled, leaving him with no opportunity to consult his lawyers.

Oola further complained that, despite an earlier court order, he had never received a copy of a previous ruling and lacked adequate facilities in prison to review the prosecution’s disclosed evidence in preparation for trial.

Chief State Attorney Richard Birivumbuka opposed the objections, arguing that the accused had effectively waived their right to legal representation after informing the court they had withdrawn instructions from their lawyers.

He urged the court to appoint counsel under the State Brief Scheme, warning that further delays could prejudice the prosecution if witnesses became unavailable or unwilling to testify.

Birivumbuka also argued that the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions was not a party to the separate application concerning legal representation, maintaining that the High Court remained constitutionally independent and was not barred from proceeding with the trial.

In his ruling, Justice Emmanuel Baguma acknowledged that the Constitution guarantees every accused person the right to a fair hearing and legal representation. However, he held that the pending application concerning the accused’s legal representation could not stay the treason trial because it had not been assigned to his court.

The judge also noted that although the prosecution had previously disclosed its evidence in the presence of defence lawyers, the accused themselves had not been provided with copies of the disclosure materials.

He directed the prosecution to immediately furnish the accused with all disclosure documents before they were returned to prison to enable them to adequately prepare their defence.

Justice Baguma further ordered the Registrar of the Criminal Division to provide the accused with certified copies of the court proceedings by Tuesday, July 14, and directed prison authorities to comply with earlier court orders requiring them to grant the accused adequate facilities to prepare their defence.

The court also ordered that Capt Denis Oola be supplied with a copy of the earlier ruling that had not been availed to him.

To address the issue of legal representation, Justice Baguma directed the registrar to provide the accused with a list of advocates under the State Brief Scheme by Tuesday, July 14, from which they could select counsel.

He ruled that if the accused declined to choose lawyers from the State Brief panel, the registrar would appoint counsel on their behalf to ensure that the trial proceeds without further delay.
The case was adjourned to Wednesday, July 15, 2026, at 11:00 a.m.

-Observer

Invest or Donate towards HICGI New Agency Global Media Establishment – Watch video here