Court issues production warrant for lawyer Eron Kiiza

KAMPALA, UGANDA | THE INDEPENDENT | The High Court in Kampala has issued a production warrant directing the officer in Charge of Kitalya, Luzira, Kigo and Nakasongola prisons to produce lawyer Eron Kiiza before Court next week  for hearing of his bail application.

According to the order signed by the Assistant Registrar Criminal Division of the High Court Godfrey Ngobi Ssalaamu which URN has seen,  the prisons is directed to deliver Kiiza on March 25th at 9am before Justice Michael Elubu without fail.

Following the jail term , Kiiza applied for Bail about three weeks ago. Kiiza contends that he has a fixed place of abode at Central Kiwatule Zone, Kiwatule Ward, Nakawa Division, Kampala City, within the jurisdiction of the High Court.

He convinces court that he has three sound and substantial sureties ready and willing to stand for me, and prepared to abide by all the conditions set by the Court who include his wife Sylvia Tumwebaze  the Archives and Data Manager of Hima Cement, Two lawyers including Dr Busingye Kabumba a Lecturer of Law at Makerere University and Primah Kwagala the Executive Director of Women’s Probono Initiative who are both his friends.

Eron Kiiza notes that  he is a family man with three young children aged between 4 and 10 years who need him as a parent and keeping him in prison, he is likely to cause  harm on both  his parental and professional obligations as he is the sole partner at his law Firm of Kiiza and Mugisha Company Advocates.

He also asked Court to release him citing good conduct and his pending appeal which he believes has a high likelihood of success among other grounds.

However, in a response filed by the office of the DPP through an affidavit, Chief State Attorney Joseph Kyomuhendo, they say that , as an advocate, Kiiza ought to have known about court decorum and acted in the manner expected of his standing in order to protect the dignity of the court process.

Kyomuhendo  states that the conviction reflects the need to protect the court process and underscores the necessity for a restrictive stance on bail in such matters.

The DPP’s opposition to Kiiza’s bail application is based on 11 grounds and indicates that Kiiza shall be put to strict proof of his allegations.

Additionally, Kyomuhendo argues that Kiiza’s right of appeal lies with the Court Martial Appeals Court, not the High Court.

Kyomuhendo also pointed out that the Supreme Court’s decree in Constitutional Appeal No. 02 of 2021, which Kiiza’s legal team relied on, only applies to civilians tried under Section 119 (1) (g), now Section 117 (1) (g) of the UPDF Act, and not advocates found in contempt of court under Sections 169 (1) (g) and 212(9) of the UPDF Act.

According to Kyomuhendo,  Kiiza has not shown any exceptional circumstances warranting bail.  He says the sureties presented by Kiiza are also not substantial, as they live in different locations and have no direct control over him.

Kyomuhendo stated that these sureties cannot compel Kiiza to appear in court if granted bail.

” In reply to the Applicant’s list of sureties, it is our considered submission that they are not substantial. For instance, on the issue of place of abode, all the three sureties presented by the Applicant do not adduce evidence to show whether they are tenants or landlords. They further show that they live in different locations and therefore incapable to compelling the Applicant to attend Court”, said Kyomuhendo.

The Prosecutors also argue that the appeal is frivolous and has no possibility of success because this the High Court has no jurisdiction to entertain the appeal. It is the Prosecution’s response that the Appeal by Kiiza should be handled by the Court Martial Appeals Court because the High Court has no jurisdiction to entertain it.

“That in further reply thereto, the Applicant was convicted and sentenced in accordance with the law, and this Court has no jurisdiction to hear and grant an application for bail pending appeal before the Court Martial Appeal Court “, says Kyomuhendo.

The DPP also disputed Kiiza’s claim that his appeal will be substantially delayed due to the backlog in the court system. Kyomuhendo stated that the High court has a good record of disposing of cases.

As such, the DPP urged the court to deny Kiiza’s bail application, citing the need to maintain court decorum and uphold the integrity of the court process.

Kyomuhendo prayed that the court considers the totality of the averments contained in the affidavit and finds that the balance of convenience lies squarely with the maintenance of  keeping Kiiza  in prison.

Last month, High Court Civil Division Judge Dr Douglas Singinza dismissed a habeas corpus application filed by Kiiza for lack of jurisdiction, stating that it had been wrongly filed.

Eron Kiiza was convicted on January 7th 2025 when he had gone to represent Dr Kizza Besigye and  Hajji Obeid Lutaale.

His evidence before Court indicates that as he approached the bar, he was blocked, obstructed, and denied access by armed military personnel dressed in military police attire.

“When I demanded an explanation for my denial of access, none was given.This prompted me to insist on my right of access to the bar as an advocate”, said Eron Kiiza.

Kiiza adds that within minutes, the court clerk violently pushed him away, and the military police orderlies descended on him with blows, kicks, fists, and batons.

“They violently dragged me from the courtroom to the dock while continuing to brutally assault me”, reads Kiiza’s affidavit.

Eron Kiiza further states that after being forcibly removed from the dock and detained in the holding cells, the military police officers continued assaulting him until fellow inmates intervened.

Eron Kiiza was subsequently convicted of contempt of court and sentenced to 9 months’ imprisonment , a sentence for which he has so far served more than two months at Kitalya Min-Max Prison.

****

URN