Lawyers in stand-off over Besigye matter

As Uganda's veteran politician Kizza Besigye was again remanded to prison in December, lawyers from him 50-strong global defence team complained of harassment, according to the Monitor. Besigye, has had run-ins with the current government for the past 20 years. He was expected to appear again on 7 January in the General Court Martial. The long adjournment was granted after the state, led by Judge Advocate Raphael Mugisha, who reasoned that a shorter one-week extension, as requested by Besigye’s defence team, was insufficient for them to reorganise themselves. Besigye, alongside his aide, Obeid Lutale, face charges related to security, and being in unlawful possession of firearms and ammunition. Defence lawyers representing Besigye brought to the attention of the chairman of the General Court Martial the harassment that they are subjected to by security officers. ‘ ... I rise to express our displeasure as regards the manner we have been treated at the entrance. When we enter here in these premises, we are supposed to be officers of court and we are supposed to be treated as such,' lawyer Luyimbazi Nalukoola said. Presiding chairman of the court, Brigadier Robert Freeman Mugabe, promised to look into the issues raised by the defence team, another Monitor report says.

Meanwhile, Kenya's former Justice Minister Martha Wangari Karua was denied a temporary practising certificate by the Law Council of Uganda. She had filed an application seeking to join the 50-member legal team in defending Besigye and Lutale, according to The Independent. She would have been part of the team from the Pan-African Lawyers Union and the International Commission of Jurists that have taken interest in the trial. The Law Council of Uganda rejected Karua’s application, saying her practising certificate and letter of good standing from Law Society of Kenya were not notarised. Law Society of Kenya President Faith Odiambo expressed what she described as their unqualified disenchantment with the ‘derogatory, contemptuous and high handed decision taken by the Law Council of Uganda’. She said the decision not only offended the mutual co-operation that exists between the Kenyan and Ugandan Bar, but the manner in which it was communicated and the reasons given are ludicrous and distasteful. ‘It is inconceivable that the Law Council of Uganda would hold such little regard for Kenyan practitioners, no less, a reputable member of the Senior Counsel Bar,’ said Odhiambo. ‘As things stand, Kenyan lawyers continue to face unreasonable constraints in their efforts to practise in neighbouring countries,’ Odhiambo stated. ‘LSK will be engaging the Attorney-General immediately to bring the overdue impasse over cross-border practice to a conducive end. We must either find a symbiotic, reciprocal and formal engagement that promotes the interest of all parties or preserve the dignity of the Kenyan legal practice by withdrawing from lopsided arrangements marred with non-committal and disingnenuity.’ She further noted that the Law Society of Kenya was considering, after necessary consultations, the suspension of admission of advocates from Uganda Law Society until such a time as reciprocal arrangements are appreciated and implemented. The East Africa Law Society and the Uganda Law Society also condemned the decision.

Second report in the Monitor

First report in the Monitor

Full report in The Independent