A chaotic scene unfolded at the Judiciary Headquarters in Uganda on Tuesday morning when a team of lawyers and journalists, led by prominent figures such as Erias Lukwago, Eron Kizza, and Martha Karua, were blocked from entering the premises. The team had arrived to meet Uganda’s Chief Justice, but their mission was met with resistance from security personnel, resulting in a brief commotion as the group attempted to force their way into the offices.
The lawyers were following up on a key ruling issued by the Constitutional Court, which declared that the trial of civilians in a court martial was unconstitutional. This ruling had direct implications for their clients, Kizza Besigye and Obeid Lutale, both facing charges related to national security and the unlawful possession of firearms and ammunition. The trial had been adjourned just the day before, with the court deciding to push the case to December 10, a decision that prompted the legal team to take immediate action.
In the midst of the chaos, security officers struggled to maintain control as the group of lawyers, accompanied by journalists, attempted to gain access to the Judiciary Headquarters. The confrontation drew attention due to the high-profile nature of the case, as well as the involvement of Karua, a seasoned Kenyan lawyer and the leader of the National Rainbow Coalition-Kenya (Narc-K) party. Karua had been enlisted to defend Besigye in the court martial, but her involvement was contingent on obtaining a temporary practising license from the Ugandan Law Council.
The situation came to a head during a closed-door meeting between the lawyers and Besigye, where the team had hoped to discuss the next steps in their client’s defence. However, the lack of a processed licence for Karua presented a significant obstacle, as she could not legally represent Besigye in court without it. The lawyers requested an adjournment of the case to allow the necessary paperwork for Karua to be expedited, a move that has stirred political and legal tensions in Uganda.
This incident is not the first time that Besigye has found himself embroiled in legal battles under the country’s court martial system. In 2006, Besigye was charged with treason and other crimes, though the charges were later dismissed. The latest charges stem from allegations that Besigye and Lutale were abducted by Ugandan security operatives in Nairobi, where they had reportedly planned to attend Karua’s book launch before being forcibly taken back to Uganda.
In an interview with NTV Uganda on Monday, Karua explained that her application for a temporary practising licence had not yet been processed at the time Besigye was being arraigned at the court martial. She recounted her conversation with Justice Irene Mulyagonja, who assured her that the matter would be addressed promptly. Karua emphasized the urgency of the situation, highlighting that without the approval of her application, she would be unable to represent Besigye in court, an obstacle that could significantly impact the outcome of the trial.
Karua’s involvement in the case has drawn attention not only because of her legal expertise but also due to the political ramifications of her participation in a trial that many see as politically motivated. Her role as a prominent opposition figure in Kenya adds another layer of complexity to the case, which has already attracted significant media attention.
As the situation develops, all eyes will be on the Uganda Judiciary and the Law Council to see whether they will expedite Karua’s application and allow her to participate in Besigye’s defence. The decision made in the coming days could have profound implications not just for the trial but also for Uganda’s judicial system, which has faced criticism over its handling of politically sensitive cases.
With the trial set to resume on December 10, the pressure on the Ugandan government and judiciary to ensure a fair and transparent process continues to mount. The next few days will be crucial in determining the legal fate of Besigye, Lutale, and Karua, as well as the broader implications for the rule of law in Uganda.
