After two adjournments, the General Court Martial decided to further remand Dr Kizza Besigye and his aide Obeid Lutale Kamulegeya until next month. Besigye and Lutale declined to take plea. The Museveni Military Court appeared keen to sweep constitutional provisions under the carpet.
The judge advocate insisted his word is final. And the army tribunal ruled (in its favour!) that it had the jurisdiction to try Besigye and Lutale in the court that should be trying UPDF officers.
Lawyers representing Besigye – who included Martha Karua, Erias Lukwago and Ernest Kalibbala – had sought constitutional interpretation as to whether Parliament by legislating to confer jurisdiction to military Courts over civilians violated article 79 of the constitution; whether the acts of the court martial are in violation of article 208 (2)of the constitution which subjects the UPDF under civilian authority.
“By asserting jurisdiction over civilians, the General Court Martial is placing itself above civilian authority, which directly violates Article 208 of the Constitution,” argued Kalibbala.
They had also sought answers as to whether the court martial has the mandate to try civilians when the Constitutional Court had ruled that they had no such jurisdiction in the cases of Micheal Kabaziguruka, Andrew Karamagi, Captain Amon Byarugaba Vs the Attorney General.
“Military courts are meant for disciplinary matters within the armed forces. Civilians cannot be subjected to their jurisdiction without undermining their constitutional rights,” said lawyer Fredrick K. Mpanga, adding that even those military officers have rights protected under the constitution.
“Joining the military does not mean forfeiting fundamental rights and freedoms. The Constitution remains the supreme law.”
There were also questions on whether the court martial was independent since it is under the High Command, and given that the members of the court martial are serving UPDF officers, are appointed by the Commander in Chief, Gen Yoweri Museveni, for whom Dr Kizza Besigye has been a known political opponent.
“As a body subordinate to the executive, the General Court Martial cannot guarantee the independence and impartiality required under Article 28(1) of the Constitution,” submitted Kalibbala.
The other questions touched on whose responsibility was it to decide who should be arraigned in the military court.
Another point of contention was whether the Ugandan government violated the Constitution and international protocols when it abducted Besigye and Lutale from Nairobi.
The defence team also sought to know whether by imprisoning lawyer Eron Kiiza, the military tribunal had violated their rights to legal representation under article 28 (3).
They wondered if the ‘convicted’ Kiiza could be allowed to represent his clients who had given him instructions to that effect. In the end, the general court martial chairman Brig Freeman Mugabe ruled that the military court has jurisdiction to try the accused, including for crimes committed outside of Uganda.
“This court, after listening to the submissions of both Counsel for the accused and the State, considered the relevant laws relating to this application and has deliberated on this application and finds as follows: that jurisdiction is a creature of statute, and section 208 of the UPDF Act gives powers to this court to try any person who has committed an offense in Uganda and outside Uganda,” ruled Mugabe.
“Two, that there is no defect in the charge sheet, because the accused is charged under Ugandan law, the UPDF Act, which clearly defines defense forces to mean Uganda People’s Defense Forces.”
Mugabe also said no extradition treaty between Uganda and Kenya had been breached in the abduction of Besigye and Lutale.
“To the contrary, this court finds that the accused being brought to Uganda through a memorandum of understanding between Uganda and Kenya on defense and security for persons suspected of having committed serious crimes did not amount to abduction. This Court has considered the consolidations of the Constitution Court in Omar Awad Omar and others, which was cited by counsel for the accused from paragraph 25 on page 63 to page 74 of the judgment, and entirely agrees with the court,” he said.
The defence team was not convinced. Besigye and Lutale declined to take plea. The case was adjourned to February 03, 2025.
Some of Besigye’s supporters like Kampala Deputy Lord Mayor Doreen Nyanjura said the Museveni military court had a predetermined judgement.
“The Chairman Court martial ignored all the questions/concerns raised by KB’s legal team, he even rejected attempts by the legal team to challenge his clearly biased ruling. Dr Kizza Besigye and Hajji Obeid Kamulegeya declined to take plea,” she wrote after the accused were further remanded.
“Clearly, this is a kangaroo court working on orders. The judge advocate once again emphasized that his word is final and this has indeed been demonstrated all through. No amount of law quoted by [Kizza Besigye]’s legal team will change a pre-determined case.”
On Monday, there was a new twist in the Besigye case before the Museveni military court. See Details Here.
Last week, the Museveni military arrested fearless Besigye lawyer Eron Kiiza, convicted him and sentenced him to nine months in prison for contempt of court. In earlier sittings, Kiiza had ‘shaken tables’ in the Museveni military court. See Details Here and There.
Meanwhile, Besigye lawyer Eron Kiiza’s health condition remains an issue of concern, with one of those who have visited him in prison reporting his blood smelling breath, body swellings, severe pain. (See Details Here).
Please Follow us on Whatsapp and X for More Stories HERE and THERE.
For comments on this report, story tips or sponsored content, send us a Whatsapp message on +256 705 690 819 or E-mail us on [email protected]).
