The Independent Uganda: You get the Truth we Pay the Price
KAMPALA, UGANDA | THE INDEPENDENT | The Attorney General has opposed the release of Dr. Kizza Besigye and Obeid Lutale from Luzira Prison, arguing that their continued detention is lawful and in compliance with the Supreme Court’s decision. The Attorney General presented this opposition before Civil Division Judge Dr. Douglas Singiza, shortly after Besigye’s lawyers requested an order for his release and the release of Lutale, arguing that the duo is being held in prison without valid remand warrants.
Ernest Kalibala, leading Besigye’s legal team, told the court that Besigye has no pending case except one in which he is accused of inciting violence at Buganda Road Court. Kalibala pointed out that Buganda Road Court granted Besigye bail, but despite this, he remains in prison rather than being allowed to go home. Medard Lubega Sseggona argued that Besigye and Lutale are being held without criminal case numbers and are victims of indefinite detention.
Sseggona contended that they are being persecuted rather than prosecuted. Counsel Samuel Muyizzi referred to Article 143 of the Constitution, which prohibits detention without an ongoing trial, noting that both Besigye and Lutale are being held unlawfully. He also highlighted that the court martial is defunct, and argued that continuing their detention in military courts was legally untenable.
In addition, Muyizzi pointed to Article 120, which bars the Director of Public Prosecutions from taking cases from the court-martial, and called for their release. On the other hand, Lawyer Erias Lukwago accused the Attorney General of failing to act on the Supreme Court’s directive to release their clients. He criticized the Attorney General for not taking any steps to implement the Supreme Court’s decision, despite it being clear and binding.
In response, Senior State Attorney Johnson Natuhwera, representing the Attorney General’s chambers, opposed the release, emphasizing that the issue at hand was whether Besigye and Lutale’s detention was legal. He stated that the application for habeas corpus was not meant to review the Supreme Court’s decision. Natuhwera argued that the Supreme Court’s 200-page judgment was clear, and if anyone misunderstood it, they were free to seek clarification from the Supreme Court.
He pointed out that the judgment did not order the release of Besigye or Lutale, but rather the transfer of their cases from the military tribunals to civilian courts. He also referenced an affidavit from George Kallemera, an official from the Attorney General’s office, which detailed the government’s efforts to implement the Supreme Court’s ruling. This included writing to the Chief Justice on February 3rd, 2025, seeking guidance on transferring the files, and the appointment of Dr. Flavian Zeija as the liaison officer on February 4th.
According to Natuhwera, the government received the decree from the Supreme Court on February 13th, 2025, and it was signed on February 17th, 2025. He argued that the government had already begun taking the necessary steps to implement the decision. Natuhwera further argued that if the Supreme Court had intended to cancel the remand warrants for Besigye and Lutale, it would have explicitly done so in its judgment.
He also pointed out that the Chief Justice did not order their release, and emphasized that the court intended to validate the existing warrants, including those for Besigye and Lutale. He concluded by stressing that Besigye’s continued detention is lawful and that releasing him would be a violation of the Supreme Court’s decision. He also noted that if the High Court were to release Besigye, it would be in contempt of the Supreme Court’s order.
State Attorney Jackie Amusugut supported Natuhwera’s submission, arguing that the government had already started the process to comply with the Supreme Court’s decision. However, Amusugut’s statement that the court martial is still a court drew boos from the courtroom audience. Amusugut asked the court to dismiss the habeas corpus application as premature, emphasizing that the government is taking steps to comply with the Supreme Court’s ruling.
Besigye’s lawyers are expected to provide a brief response to the Attorney General’s submissions. Justice Ssingiza promised to deliver his judgement on notice.
*****
URN
