Kizza Besigye Tells High Court He Was Brought Under Duress as Prosecution Seeks Trial to Proceed

KAMPALA – Veteran opposition leader Dr. Kizza Besigye on Monday told the High Court that he had been brought to court “under duress” and appeared without legal representation as prosecutors urged the court to proceed with his treason trial, arguing that repeated absence of defence lawyers was delaying the case.

Besigye is jointly charged with Hajj Obeid Lutale and Capt. Denis Oola in a high-profile treason case before Justice Emmanuel Baguma.

Besigye Appears in Court Without Lawyers

Proceedings began shortly after 2:26 p.m. when Justice Baguma entered the courtroom and called the case.

Besigye and his co-accused, Lutale, were escorted into the dock in handcuffs as the prosecution informed the court that it was ready to begin the hearing, with witnesses already present.

However, Thomas Jatiko, appearing for the defence, informed the court that the accused persons’ legal team was absent.

Addressing the court personally, Besigye said he had been compelled to attend the hearing despite unresolved concerns over legal representation.

“We are not represented, my Lord. I came here by duress and am still in handcuffs,” Besigye told the court.

Defence Raises Concerns Over Fair Trial

Besigye argued that several outstanding issues must first be resolved before the trial can commence, including access to legal counsel, prosecution evidence and official court records.

He also referred to recent public remarks made by President Yoweri Museveni, suggesting they were relevant to concerns about receiving a fair trial.

Justice Baguma, however, directed the accused to limit his submissions to matters relating to legal representation.

When asked whether anyone had prevented them from choosing lawyers, Besigye said the defence had already filed an application challenging difficulties in accessing their legal team while in custody.

He also claimed prison authorities had failed to deliver a letter the accused wrote on Friday outlining their concerns.

“Our legal representation is clearly in question. We have challenges accessing our lawyers, accessing disclosures and obtaining the court record. After accessing all we need, then we shall be ready for trial,” Besigye said.

Capt. Denis Oola Says He Received Late Notice

Co-accused Capt. Denis Oola also told the court that he had only been informed of Monday’s hearing at around 9:00 a.m., leaving him unable to notify his lawyers.

“I never knew there was court today. It is my prayer that service of such hearings should be done to all, and thereafter I will be ready,” Oola said.

Responding to allegations that prison authorities had withheld correspondence from the accused, Assistant Superintendent of Prisons Emmanuel Tuhirwe told the court that all inmate letters undergo a verification process before being forwarded, although he could not immediately confirm whether the specific letter had been delivered.

Prosecution Accuses Defence of Delaying Trial

The prosecution, led by Assistant Director of Public Prosecutions Richard Birivumbuka, argued that the continued absence of defence lawyers amounted to an abuse of court process intended to delay the trial.

Birivumbuka told the court that Besigye and Lutale were represented by more than 25 advocates, none of whom had formally withdrawn from the case.

He submitted that the repeated failure of the defence team to appear should be treated as a waiver of the accused persons’ right to legal representation of their choice.

“The prosecution has been ready since completing disclosures. Today we have witnesses ready to testify. This continued absence of lawyers constitutes an abuse of the court process,” Birivumbuka argued.

He asked the court either to proceed with the hearing or appoint state-funded lawyers to represent the accused if necessary.

The prosecution also argued that recent political statements and pending constitutional or human rights applications should not halt the criminal proceedings.

Besigye Rejects Prosecution Claims

Besigye rejected claims that the defence was deliberately delaying the trial, insisting that the legal team had consistently informed the court about challenges affecting communication with their clients.

He argued that although prosecution evidence had been served on their lawyers, prison restrictions had prevented the accused from personally reviewing the documents needed to prepare their defence.

“The disclosures were made to our lawyers. For us to receive them, we need the cooperation of prison authorities,” he said.

Besigye further accused the prosecution of contributing to delays, noting that disclosure of evidence was only completed in June despite investigations having concluded much earlier.

He maintained that pending applications concerning legal representation and alleged constitutional rights violations should be determined before the substantive hearing begins.

Court Yet to Decide Next Step

The High Court is expected to rule on the issues raised by both the prosecution and the defence before deciding whether the treason trial can proceed.

The case remains one of Uganda’s most closely watched political prosecutions, with proceedings attracting significant public and legal interest.