Opposition politician Dr. Kizza Besigye has raised fresh concerns over the safety and availability of his legal team, arguing that he cannot receive a fair hearing when lawyers representing him are allegedly being intimidated and prevented from carrying out their duties.
Besigye voiced the concerns before the High Court on Tuesday, shortly after Justice Emmanuel Baguma declined to temporarily stay proceedings in his human rights application against Chief of Defence Forces [CDF] Gen. Muhoozi Kainerugaba. The judge directed parties to file written submissions in a new application challenging the right to representation.
‘You have heard our lawyers are on the run and you are now advising us to assemble other lawyers who will not run because the person terrorising them is the accused,’ Besigye told the court.
‘This is why it is fundamentally important that if there is justice in this court, then the whole question of how we are represented should be addressed before this application can be heard.’
Besigye questioned how the court expected him and his co-applicant, Hajji Obeid Lutale Kamulegeya, to comply with filing before deadline when key members of their legal team were unavailable.
‘Who is to make the submissions you are ordering when everybody is on the run?’ he asked.
He also complained that the respondents had replied to the application before being formally served, and reiterated his long-standing concerns about the conduct of the criminal proceedings against him.
‘The main case you are talking about, we have never seen the disclosures because of lack of facilities. So we come to attend a trial with our eyes covered, hands and feet tied. How can we have justice in that case?’ Besigye said.
His remarks came moments after Justice Baguma ruled that an emergency application concerning legal representation and the security of defence lawyers could not stop the court from proceeding with the human rights case.
‘However, the applicants have a right to choose their own lawyers and be represented by representatives of their own choice,’ the judge ruled.
Adding, ‘I will go ahead and direct that the applicants get their own other lawyers to beef up their lawyers who are present.’
Justice Baguma ordered the applicants to file written submissions by July 2, the respondents to respond by July 4, and any rejoinder by July 6. He set July 8 as the date for delivering his ruling through the Electronic Court Case Management Information System [ECCMIS].
‘The application, which I have not seen, cannot stop this court from hearing the matter,’ the judge said.
Earlier, lawyers representing Besigye and Lutaale asked the court to suspend proceedings in the human rights application until an emergency application addressing legal representation, security of counsel and service of court documents was heard.
One of the defence lawyers, Mr Moses Tugume, told court that the applicants had instructed 13 law firms and about 50 advocates under a team led by Kenyan Senior Counsel Martha Karua and former Kampala Lord Mayor Erias Lukwago.
According to Tugume, the legal team had been significantly disrupted after Karua was denied entry into Uganda and Lukwago was abducted and later charged.
‘This application was on the basis of instructions by the applicants to 13 law firms and about 50 advocates,’ Tugume submitted.
Adding, ‘Our lead counsel are not here. Martha was deported and declared persona non grata [an unwanted person in the country] when she had come prepared for the matter, and her deputy Lukwago was abducted shortly on his way to serve.’
He said the applicants had instructed their lawyers to first seek court intervention on issues affecting legal representation before proceeding with the substantive case.
‘We consulted our clients and they insisted they need their full defence team. We have filed an application to address all matters concerning the right to legal representation, security of defence counsel and service of court process unhindered,’ Tugume said.
Another defence lawyer, Brian Turinawe, echoed the concerns, arguing that members of the defence team had been subjected to intimidation.
‘The day Lukwago was abducted, he had told me to meet him at his chambers for instructions, but he never showed up because he was abducted,’ Turinawe told court.
‘If the lead lawyers are stopped from attending court to represent their clients, is that not a violation of the right to representation? There is continuous harassment of defence lawyers,’ Turinawe submitted.
However, the Attorney General’s Chambers opposed the request for a stay of proceedings.
Mr. Johnson Natuhwera, a senior state attorney from the Attorney General’s Chambers, told court that the respondents had complied with earlier directives and that the applicants still had adequate legal representation.
‘The applicants had time to respond to the alleged deportation of Karua and Lukwago. They had time to reassemble lawyers,’ Natuhwera submitted.
‘Right now they have about 10 able lawyers. There is no law that says if the lead lawyer is not present, court cannot go on,’ he added.
He argued that the absence of particular lawyers could not be used to halt proceedings and asked court to proceed with hearing the human rights application on its merits.
The application before court arises from allegations that Gen. Muhoozi made public statements threatening Besigye and portraying him as guilty before the conclusion of criminal proceedings arising from treason-related charges.
Besigye and Lutale argue that the statements violated their constitutional rights and undermined their right to a fair trial.
The respondents deny the allegations and have asked court to dismiss the application with costs.
Justice Baguma’s ruling on July 8 is expected to determine the next step in the human rights case and provide guidance on how it will affect the main terrorism-related proceedings against Besigye and Lutale.