Uganda’s courts have rarely been short of drama.
But last week, a series of developments unfolding across the country’s justice system raised fresh questions about access to legal representation, the limits of state power, reputational damage in the digital age, and the balance between punishment and due process.
At the centre of the legal storm is the treason case involving opposition veteran Dr Kizza Besigye, whose defence team now finds itself confronting challenges almost as serious as those facing its client.
The situation intensified after Erias Lukwago, Kampala’s Lord Mayor and Besigye’s lead counsel, was arrested by Special Forces Command operatives on June 15. According to court records, Lukwago was later taken to Kira Police Station before being produced before the Makindye Chief Magistrates Court, where he was charged with misprision of treason and remanded to Luzira Maximum Security Prison.
The charge stems from allegations that Lukwago failed to disclose information relating to an alleged treasonous plot said to have occurred between 2021 and 2024. His arrest immediately triggered concerns about the future of Besigye’s own trial.
With the lead lawyer now behind bars, questions emerged about whether the opposition figure would be deprived of counsel at a critical stage of proceedings. Medard Ssegona, who leads Lukwago’s defence team, dismissed those concerns.
“Nothing stops him from still representing Dr. Kizza,” Ssegona said. “Lawyers are chosen by their clients, not the adversary.”
The remark underscored what many lawyers regard as a fundamental principle of justice: that an accused person has the right to choose legal representation without interference from opponents in a case.
Yet Lukwago’s detention was only the first complication. Days later, Senior Counsel Martha Karua, the Kenyan lawyer serving as co-lead counsel in Besigye’s defence, was denied entry into Uganda after arriving at Entebbe International Airport aboard a Kenya Airways flight.
Karua had travelled with Charles Kanjama, President of the Law Society of Kenya, intending to attend proceedings related to Lukwago’s bail application. According to a statement issued by her Executive Office on Monday, Karua was detained at the airport and held without communication.
“Senior Counsel Karua, who currently serves as lead counsel in the treason case against Dr. Kizza Besigye and his co-accused, Obeid Lutale, was detained at the airport,” the statement said, adding that her team was awaiting communication regarding her status and return.
Karua has been involved in Besigye’s legal defence since his controversial arrest in Nairobi on November 16, 2024. She has previously appeared in Ugandan courts under a valid legal certificate registered through Lukwago’s law firm.
The combination of Lukwago’s detention and Karua’s exclusion has inevitably fuelled debate about whether Besigye’s legal team is facing extraordinary obstacles. Ssegona, however, maintained that Karua’s participation need not end at the airport.
“Even when they stop Karua, she can still argue the case online, even without coming here,” he said.
Attention has also turned to Lukwago’s bail application. Ssegona expressed confidence in its prospects.
“Under the law, my client has good and satisfactory grounds to justify bail,” he said. “Going by the law, strictly going by the law, yes, I expect him to be granted bail.”
The defence team additionally raised concerns about Lukwago’s health, asking the court to allow him access to Mulago Hospital for examination and treatment. The court deferred the matter, indicating it would be addressed in its ruling on bail.
Even if bail is denied, Besigye’s legal team insists the case will continue. Counsel Eron Kizza signalled his readiness to step in. “I will be there,” he said when asked whether he was prepared to proceed in the absence of the two senior lawyers. He described the remaining team as “the usual lawyers, except those two.”
While the Besigye proceedings dominated public attention, other significant court decisions quietly reshaped legal debates elsewhere.
URA OFFICER WINS SHS 100 MILLION IN DEFAMATION CASE
In one of the week’s most closely watched civil cases, the High Court awarded Uganda Revenue Authority customs officer Nicholas Jjengo Shs100 million in damages after finding that defamatory messages posted on a senior management WhatsApp forum had seriously damaged his reputation.
The messages, posted by fellow URA officer James Abola in September 2022, portrayed Jjengo as a man wanted by police and accused him of violent conduct involving a woman and a vehicle pursuit.
Abola argued that he had merely relayed information received from a police officer and that his communication was protected by qualified privilege because investigations were ongoing.
Justice Isaac Bonny Teko disagreed. Although the court accepted that the communication occurred within a privileged setting, it found that privilege had been defeated by malice because Abola failed to verify the allegations despite having access to information that could have confirmed their accuracy.
The judgment described his actions as demonstrating “reckless disregard for the Plaintiff’s reputation.”
The court ordered Abola to apologise publicly on the same platform and awarded Jjengo Shs70 million in general damages and Shs30 million in exemplary damages, with interest accruing until full payment.
The ruling serves as a reminder that social media platforms and messaging groups are not beyond the reach of defamation law.
OKELLO APPEALS DEATH SENTENCE
Meanwhile, another case is moving into the appellate stage. Christopher Okello Onyum, who was sentenced to death in April for the murder of four nursery school children at the Ggaba Early Childhood Development Centre, has formally challenged both his conviction and sentence before the Court of Appeal.
Okello was convicted on four counts of murder after a fast-tracked trial before Lady Justice Alice Komuhangi Khaukha, who described the crimes as “barbaric” and among the “rarest of the rare cases.”
In documents filed from Luzira Prison, Okello argues that the trial court failed to properly evaluate the evidence and inadequately considered medical evidence concerning his mental condition. He further contends that the death sentence imposed was excessive and should be overturned. The Court of Appeal is yet to constitute a panel to hear the matter.
HIGH COURT UPHOLDS URA TAX RULING AGAINST G4S
Elsewhere, the Commercial Division of the High Court delivered a significant judgment affecting employment benefits and taxation.
The court dismissed an appeal by G4S Secure Solutions Uganda Limited over a tax dispute concerning meals provided to security guards deployed at client sites, including facilities operated by CNOOC and Total E&P.
G4S had argued that the meals were operational necessities linked to demanding 24-hour security shifts and were paid for by clients rather than the company itself. URA maintained that the meals constituted a taxable benefit because they were available only to selected employees rather than to all staff on equal terms.
The court agreed with the tax authority, concluding that the meals amounted to taxable employment income under the Income Tax Act because eligibility depended on deployment location rather than employment status.
Taken together, these cases reveal a judiciary confronting questions that extend far beyond individual litigants. They touch on political rights, freedom of representation, digital reputation, criminal accountability and tax compliance.
They also illustrate how the courts remain one of the few arenas where some of Uganda’s most consequential disputes are tested in public view. For now, the spotlight remains firmly fixed on the Besigye proceedings.
But across courtrooms in Kampala and beyond, the week’s decisions suggest that the struggle over law, rights and accountability is being fought on many fronts at once.