KAMPALA — The High Court has ordered opposition politician Dr Kizza Besigye and his co-accused to choose lawyers from the state's legal aid panel by Tuesday or have counsel appointed for them.
The ruling, made Monday, comes after Besigye told court he had been brought there under duress and without legal representation as his treason trial moved closer to hearing.
Justice Emmanuel Baguma issued the directive after hearing submissions from both the prosecution and the accused over the absence of the defence team, a development that once again halted the commencement of the trial.
Besigye, who is jointly charged with Hajj Obeid Lutale and Capt Denis Oola, appeared in the dock in handcuffs.
Addressing the court, Besigye said he had been brought to court under duress and maintained that the accused were unable to proceed without legal representation of their choice.
He told court they had pending concerns over access to their lawyers, prosecution disclosures and copies of the court record, all of which they considered necessary to prepare their defence.
Besigye also sought to raise concerns over recent public remarks by President Museveni regarding the case, but Justice Baguma directed him to confine his submissions to the issue of legal representation.
Capt Oola told court he had only learnt of the hearing at about 9am on Monday and had not informed his lawyers because he had not been notified earlier.
The dispute over legal representation comes against the backdrop of the absence of Besigye's two principal lawyers.
Kenyan Senior Counsel Martha Karua, who has led Besigye's defence team, was deported from Uganda and declared persona non grata earlier this year, while another member of the defence team, Kampala Lord Mayor Erias Lukwago, is currently in custody after being charged with offences linked to the same case in which he had been representing Besigye and his co-accused.
The prosecution, led by Assistant Director of Public Prosecutions Richard Birivumbuka, argued that the repeated absence of defence lawyers had become a deliberate tactic to delay the trial.
Birivumbuka told court that Besigye and Lutale were represented by more than 25 advocates and that none had formally withdrawn from the case.
He asked the court to find that the accused had effectively waived their right to legal representation of their choice and either proceed with the hearing or appoint lawyers on state brief.
The prosecution maintained that it had completed disclosure of evidence, assembled witnesses and was ready to begin hearing the case.
Responding, Besigye rejected suggestions that the defence was frustrating the proceedings, insisting that although disclosure materials had been served on their lawyers, prison authorities had prevented the accused from accessing the documents themselves.
He also argued that pending applications concerning legal representation and alleged violations of their constitutional rights should be resolved before the trial could commence.
In his ruling, Justice Baguma acknowledged that Article 28 of the Constitution guarantees every accused person the right to a fair hearing and legal representation, particularly in cases carrying the death penalty.
The judge directed the prosecution to provide all disclosure materials directly to the accused and ordered the Criminal Division Registrar to furnish them with copies of proceedings in both the main case and related applications.
Baguma also directed Luzira Prison authorities to facilitate the accused's access to those documents.
However, noting that the case had suffered repeated setbacks over legal representation, the judge invoked Article 28(3)(e) of the Constitution and ordered the Criminal Division Registrar to prepare a list of advocates available on state brief.
He directed that the list be presented to the accused by July 14 to enable them to choose lawyers to represent them during the trial.
The judge said the appointment of lawyers on state brief would not prevent any privately retained advocates from joining the defence team if they became available.
Baguma further ruled that should the accused decline to choose lawyers from the list, the court would direct the Registrar to appoint counsel on their behalf to ensure the trial proceeds without further delay.
The case was adjourned to Wednesday, July 15, at 11am.
