Courtesy Photo; Capt. Dennis Oola, Hajji Obeid Lutale Kamulegeya and Kizza Besigye.Courtesy Photo; Capt. Dennis Oola, Hajji Obeid Lutale Kamulegeya and Kizza Besigye.

After three years, the Supreme Court has set January 31 to deliver its long-awaited verdict on whether or not civilians should continue being tried in the army court.

The judgement comes at a time when retired Col Dr Kizza Besigye and his political aide Hajj Obeid Lutale are being tried in court martial on charges of unlawful possession of firearms and soliciting for funds to oust the ruling government.

The duo which is represented by about 50 lawyers led by Kenyan Senior Counsel Martha Karua refused to take plea arguing that court martial has no jurisdiction to try civilians. “Take notice that the judgment of this appeal has been fixed for hearing for the 31st day of January, 2025 at 9:00am O’clock in the fore/afternoon or soon thereafter as the judgment in this appeal will be delivered in this court.

If no appearance is made by you or by any one in law authorized to act for you, the judgment shall be delivered in your absence,” the notice dated January 24, singed by Court Registrar read.

The notice was copied to Lukwago & Co Advocates, Rwakafuzi & Co Advocates, Alaka & Co Advocates the chambers whose lawyers represented Kabaziguruka in the lower court.

Controversies of Capt. Danes Oola

In whichever way the Supreme Court decides, the prosecution still has a task of providing more details of Capt. Danes Oola who was added as a co-accused to Besigye and Lutale.

On January 13th this year, Capt. Oola Danes 48 yrs, attached to Armored Brigade headquarters was paraded in court and charged with treachery and offences related to security contrary to section 117(1) (g) of the UPDF Act, Cap 30. He is said to be a UPDF officer bearing an army Number RO 12743.

On the contrary, our investigations reveal that either by coincidence another UPDF junior officer Capt Denish Oola Oyaa, 39 years of age from Armored Brigade was charged as a person subject to military law before the same General Court Martial, under the same Brig Freeman Mugabe on 26th February, 2024 a year back.

We are yet to reveal the charges on which Capt. Denish Oola was tried on with other three junior officers. The other there were; R0/ 14244 Lt Benjamin Eduru 36, a staff officer attached to armor Maintenance Unit, RO/13042 WOII Sunday Oryek Jenaro 48a tank engineer attached to Maintenance Unit and the fourth co-accused is RA/147705 Sgt (deserter) Bernard Morris Leku 50. Borrowed ages?

Is it possible that Capt Danes Oola who is now 48 years, is the same person who was in court martial a year ago labeled as Capt. Denish Oola Oyaa 39yrs?

The revealed photographs of the said person resemble that of Oya that was added to the chargesheet. This presents a burden to the prosecution to explain the nine-year difference between the two people and the change in names.

When contacted for a comment or clarification from the Director Defense Public Information (DDPI), the newly promoted Maj Gen Felix Kuraigye told us that he does not remember and promised to check for confirmation.

Lukwago’s bonus in the expected verdict In the event that the Friday Supreme Court verdict aligns with the Constitutional Court, Michael Kabaziguraka and other civilians before the same court will jubilate for the relief of the burden they encounter in the military court.

Whereas it will also be a win for Counsel Alaka and Rwakafuzi for their legal efforts, it will also be a political bonus to Lukwago in his political battle to retain his Lord Mayor come position come 2026.

Like it or not most opposition leaders including NUP will have to thank Lukwago and his fellow defense team.

Still in the event that the Supreme Court agrees with the three decisions of the Constitutional Court, it means all civilians with pending charges in the army courts will have their files forwarded to the civil courts for hearing and judgments could be reviewed.

Here, Besigye, Obeid and Oola will have chance to apply for bail pending hearing of the charges after sorting out the extradition and jurisdiction part of it.

References to the High Court On January 13th defense lawyers of Dr kiiza Besigye unsuccessfully requested court to give them a reference to High Court to challenge the just delivered ruling that the army court has orders to try civilians on five other grounds.

“One of the most important attributions of Article 208 is that the UPDF is subordinate to civilian courts established under the Constitution. Mr. Chairman what that means is that the Force, its members and its organs are all subordinate to civilian courts,” submitted Earnest Kalibbala one of the defense lawyers referring to the army courts that had made pronouncements to that effect.

On his part, one of the prosecutors Capt Ambroz Guma, told the Chairman and his six members that this army court is impartial and independent and the offences related to security are clearly defined in the UPDF Act.

Denying the defense submission that the army court’s hands are tied, he added that it is this army court that determine the questions that require connotation-al interpretation.

“This is a matter to be determined by evidence and at this stage, it is premature. Whereas Besigye’s lawyers argue that the court martial has no power to try civilians as it was declared by the Constitutional Court, the decision in the case of Attorney General’s appeal in Michael Kabaziguka’s petition is still pending before the Supreme Court,” Capt Guma argued.

On his part, Erias Lukwago while adding the four issues framed by Kalibbala, he also brought in the case of Aron Andrew Karamagi and argued that vague laws like section 126 is one of the uncertainties of the provision of the Constitutional Court.

“Vague laws may lead to three basic dangers and these are what we want to caution against and this is what they stated. 1. They may harm the innocent by shielding the offenses and as it is, ignorance of the law is no defense yet the law itself is false.” submitted Lukwago.

The court proceedings ended with the Judge Advocate emphasizing that the army court has powers to continue with the case and advised court not to refer the case interpretations which were already made.

The Chairman adjourned the case to 3rd February for further mention.

By; Siraje Lubwama,

Senior Investigative Journalist in crime, court land matters, human Rights.

Freelance Journalist, with Alternative Digitalk

lubwamasiraje@gmail.com

By Alternative Uganda

The Alternative Uganda born by The Jobless brotherhood in June 2014, We're a non-partisan/non-violent Social Movement whose aim is to see a youth led change. Creating Tomorrow Today: This-Is-Us . We're based in Kampala Uganda, East Africa established a NOT-FOR PROFIT online non-partisan (The Alternative Digitalk) media platform to offer space to the barred, unheard, marginalized and vulnerable voices at a NO cost.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *