The High Court in Kampala has ordered security agencies to produce Mr Duncan Keith Ayebare, a technical advisor at the Ministry of Education and Sports, who has been missing since February 13, 2026, after an alleged illegal detention.
In a ruling delivered on Friday via email, Justice Joyce Kavuma issued a writ of habeas corpus directing the Chief of Defence Forces (CDF), Chief of Defence Intelligence and Security (CDIS), Inspector General of Police, and the Attorney General to produce Mr Ayebare before court on June 2, following allegations that he was abducted by armed men and detained incommunicado for more than three months without trial.
A habeas corpus application is made in court seeking a person under detention to be brought before a judge or magistrate, especially to secure that person’s release unless lawful grounds are shown to justify their continued incarceration.
Ayebare’s family, through an application filed by his father, Rev. Robert Kayongwe Basherura, told the court that Mr Ayebare was allegedly kidnapped on February 13, 2026, by armed plain-clothed men while attending a meeting at Gayaza Junior School.
The court heard that since his disappearance, his family, friends and lawyers had failed to trace the detention facility where he was allegedly being held.
According to affidavits presented before the court, Ayebare later briefly returned home under heavy military guard before he was taken away again.
Mr William Wandera, a gardener and caretaker at Ayebare’s residence, stated that his boss arrived home on February 14, accompanied by armed men dressed in Uganda People’s Defence Forces uniforms and two plain-clothed men travelling in a numberless drone vehicle.
‘The applicant requested him to take care of his dogs and promised to return soon,’ Justice Kavuma noted in the ruling while summarising Wandera’s affidavit evidence.
However, the Uganda Police Force denied any involvement in Ayebare’s arrest or detention.
Through Detective Corporal Obed Nankunda, police told the court that investigations and searches conducted in police detention records established that Ayebare was not in police custody.
‘The allegations that the applicant is being detained by the Uganda Police Force are false, speculative, unsubstantiated and unsupported by any credible evidence,’ the respondents argued.
State Attorney lawyers also raised a preliminary objection, arguing that the alleged arresting officers were plain-clothed individuals whose institutional affiliation had not been clearly identified.
The Attorney General’s chambers further argued that the application had been filed nearly 90 days after Ayebare’s disappearance, which they said undermined the urgency typically associated with habeas corpus proceedings.
They also pointed to Gayaza Junior School head teacher Sarah Tebugurwa as the last known person with whom Ayebare had contact before his disappearance.
But lawyers representing Ayebare dismissed the objections, insisting that the matter involved serious allegations of unlawful detention and disappearance.
Ayebare’s lawyers argued that none of the security agencies, particularly the CDF and CDIS, had filed affidavits specifically denying custody of Ayebare.
While issuing the order, Justice Kavuma agreed with the applicant (Ayebare’s family) and faulted security agencies for failing to satisfactorily explain Ayebare’s whereabouts.
‘There has been no evidence that investigations and searches were conducted on other relevant security agencies,’ the judge ruled.
The court further observed that the evidence presented showed Ayebare was arrested by armed men linked to state security agencies and had never been formally charged before any court.
‘Where allegations of unlawful detention are made and remain uncontroverted, the court is entitled to infer that the detention complained of exists,’ Justice Kavuma held.
The judge emphasised that continued incommunicado detention without trial violates constitutional guarantees of personal liberty and fair hearing under Articles 23 and 28 of the Constitution.
‘In the circumstances of this case, the applicant has established sufficient grounds for the issuance of a writ of habeas corpus,’ she ruled.
Justice Kavuma subsequently ordered the respondents to produce Ayebare before the High Court Civil Division on June 2.
The trial judge did not make an order for the costs of the application.