Judge Sets Fresh Timelines in Treason Case as Besigye Threatens Court Boycott

By Skika Reporter

The High Court of Uganda in Kampala has issued fresh timelines in the ongoing treason case involving veteran opposition politician Kizza Besigye after disputes emerged over the prosecution’s handling of witness information.

Presiding judge Emmanuel Baguma ruled that the prosecution must properly serve the accused and their lawyers with an application seeking to conceal the identities of six key state witnesses before the case can proceed.

“Since there was no proper service and the defence lawyers say they have no instructions, and in the interest of justice, the prosecution is ordered to serve the accused and those lawyers who have appeared in court today,” Justice Baguma ruled on Thursday.

The judge granted the defence two weeks to file its response once the application is served, while the prosecution must file any rejoinder by March 30. The matter will return to court for mention on March 31.

Justice Baguma also postponed the pre-trial hearing of the main treason case to April 16.

The dispute arose after defence lawyers argued that prosecutors had failed to comply with an earlier court directive requiring them to disclose all evidence and witnesses they intend to rely on during the trial.

Dr Besigye, a four-time presidential contender, is facing treason charges alongside political associate Obeid Lutale and Denis Oola, a captain in the Uganda People’s Defence Forces (UPDF).

During the hearing, Kenyan senior lawyer Martha Karua, who is part of the defence team, told court that the State had not fully complied with the earlier order on disclosure.

“The prosecution has not yet made full disclosures despite an earlier order,” Karua told the court.

Another defence lawyer, Erias Lukwago, said prosecutors had initially committed to completing the disclosure process by March 3 but later submitted additional documents after that deadline.

“There is non-compliance with a court order and the commitment made to make full disclosures by March 3. Three days later they purported to serve on us ‘Volume Two’ of the intended evidence,” Lukwago said.

He further told court that the defence received additional witness statements late in the evening and that the documents lacked crucial information.

“Yesterday at about 6:30pm they served on us additional statements of six witnesses. The documents served have missing documents and there are no names or particulars of witnesses. This is not full disclosure, my Lord,” he added.

The defence team argued that the law requires the prosecution to disclose the identities and details of the witnesses it intends to present.

“The prosecution is circumventing the law. We ought to know the names and particulars of witnesses,” Lukwago said.

However, Assistant Director of Public Prosecutions Thomas Jatiko told the court that the State had already filed an application seeking to conceal the identities of six witnesses it considers critical to the case.

“The prosecution made an application before court to conceal or protect the identities of six witnesses. The prosecution disclosed their statements and these witnesses are crucial witnesses in this case,” Jatiko said.

Another defence lawyer, Fredrick Mpanga, also told the court that his law firm had not been formally served with the application.

“We have not been served with the application. It just came across us as we were entering court and we have no instructions from our clients to proceed with it,” Mpanga said.

Dr Besigye himself expressed frustration with the proceedings, telling the judge that he had not seen the application in question.

“I am extremely concerned about continuing to dismiss our concerns. You are hearing an application which myself I have not seen,” he told the court, before warning that he might stop attending the hearings.

In response, Justice Baguma assured the defence that their concerns had not been dismissed and said the issues would be addressed once the proper legal procedures were followed.