In a ruling delivered in open court on December 29, 2025, presiding judge Justice Emmanuel Baguma dismissed an application seeking a stay of proceedings in Criminal Session Case No. 335 of 2025, as well as a request for bail, directing that plea-taking should proceed immediately.

“It is therefore my view and opinion that for the interest of justice to both parties, the Applicants should proceed to take plea,” Justice Baguma ruled.

“If they so wish, they can apply for bail at any later stage if there is any delay in hearing of their case. I am aware and alive to the constitutional right of presumption of innocence of the Applicants until proven guilty.”

The judge faulted the defence for repeatedly filing interlocutory applications instead of responding to the substantive charges, noting that the case had stalled for months as a result.

“According to the court record, the Applicants were committed on 29th May 2025 and the matter was fixed for plea taking on 1st September 2025, but to date the Applicants have never taken plea,” he said.

“Instead, they resorted to filing applications after applications, making the process of plea taking difficult.”

Justice Baguma concluded that the application for stay of proceedings and bail lacked merit and dismissed it in its entirety.

“In the final result, and for the reasons stated above, this application for stay of proceedings in Criminal Session Case No. 335 of 2025 and releasing the Applicants on bail is dismissed,” he ruled.

The decision has sparked debate within legal circles, with some lawyers including Ferdinandius Loyola describing it as a new procedural precedent.

“Every day we get new precedents. Even though the Constitution and the Guidelines for Bail provide for applying for bail at any time after being charged, the new precedent is that: apply for bail after plea taking. The reason this is a new precedent is because the judge didn’t cite any single authority in support,” says lawyerLoyola

While Uganda’s Constitution and bail guidelines allow an accused person to apply for bail at any stage after being charged, the court effectively held that plea-taking must come first.

Despite the court’s directive, Dr. Besigye and Hajji Lutale declined to take plea, arguing that the indictment before court is fundamentally flawed and cannot form a lawful basis for trial.

Through their lawyers Erias Lukwago and Martha Karua, the accused challenged the validity of the indictment, stating that it was neither signed nor dated by the Registrar of the High Court as required by law.

The defence further pointed to alleged inaccuracies in the personal details and particulars of one of the co-accused, Capt. Dennis Ola, arguing that these defects rendered the charge sheet incurably defective.

Mr. Lukwago told court that proceeding with plea-taking on such an indictment would amount to a miscarriage of justice and urged the judge to halt the process until the defects were addressed.

However, the prosecution strongly opposed the objection.

Assistant Director of Public Prosecutions Thomas Jatiko, alongside Chief State Attorney Richard Birivumbuka, insisted that the accused must first enter plea, arguing that any errors on the indictment could be rectified through amendments during the trial.

After hearing both sides, Justice Baguma directed that the accused be returned to court the following day, when he is expected to rule specifically on whether the indictment is defective as alleged by the defence.

Dr. Besigye and Hajji Lutale are facing treason charges arising from what prosecutors describe as a coordinated plot to overthrow the government of Uganda between 2023 and 2025.

According to the indictment, the accused are alleged to have played central roles in organising meetings, mobilising financial resources and collecting intelligence in furtherance of the plot.

The prosecution claims that the alleged activities took place in multiple international locations, including Geneva (Switzerland), Athens (Greece), Nairobi (Kenya) and Kampala.

The two have been held on remand at Luzira Prison for over a year following their arrest in Nairobi in November last year, a detention that continues to draw scrutiny from human rights groups and opposition supporters.

The post Besigye Must Take Plea Before Bail, High Court Rules in Treason Trial appeared first on Insider Bits News.

Justice Lawrence Mugambi on Monday flatly rejected an application by State Counsel Marwa, who had pleaded for 21 days, citing delays in coordinating among government departments.

“Your lordship, I am here to plead with the court to give me more time to be able to file my response to the petition. I would request the court to give me 21 days,” Marwa submitted.

But his plea was met with sharp opposition from Senior Counsel Martha Karua, who is representing Besigye and his aide, Hajj Obeid Lutale.

“They were served in July. For a whole two months, they have not even entered an appearance,” Karua fired back.

“If they had done so and were seeking time, one would understand. But they have done nothing.”

Karua urged the court to resist what she termed “institutional complacency,” warning that the case carried weighty implications beyond the two petitioners.

“This is not just about Dr. Besigye. It is about the sanctity of Kenyan borders, the rule of law, and regional security,” she stressed.

The petition traces back to November 16, 2024, when Besigye and Lutale had travelled to Kenya for Karua’s book launch.

Court papers allege that the duo was later “violently abducted” in Nairobi by armed men claiming to be police officers.

“They bundled us into vehicles, stopped to fuel their car, and drove straight to Malaba,” Besigye recalls in his affidavit.

“At the border, we were handed to Ugandan authorities in the dead of night.”

Once across the border, the pair was allegedly detained incommunicado at Makindye Military Barracks, denied access to lawyers, family, or medical help, before facing charges before Uganda’s General Court Martial, charges they insist were fabricated.

Adding fuel to the controversy, Uganda’s government has publicly claimed that the deportation was done in coordination with Kenyan authorities, a revelation now under judicial scrutiny.

In his ruling, Justice Mugambi said the State had already been accorded ample time.

“The respondents cannot sit on their hands for months and then expect unlimited indulgence from the court,” the judge ruled, ordering the AG to file all responses within 14 days.

The post Court Orders AG to Respond in Besigye Deportation Case Within 14 Days appeared first on Insider Bits News.