Proceedings in a high-profile court session on Friday took a procedural turn after Dr. Kizza Besigye raised concerns over access to evidence, legal representation, and delays in bail hearings for his co-accused.
Addressing the court, Besigye outlined challenges that he said have hindered proper preparation for trial.
He told the court that despite prior directives from the High Court Registrar allowing the defence team exclusive access to the accused, legal counsel has faced repeated obstacles.
According to Besigye, lawyers have been denied entry into Luzira Prisons with electronic gadgets necessary to review audio and video evidence linked to the case.
He argued that the restrictions have significantly affected the defence’s ability to fully examine the prosecution’s material, raising questions about fairness and due process.
The issue of evidence disclosure, he said, remains unresolved and continues to undermine trial readiness.
On the matter of bail, Besigye highlighted delays affecting his co-accused, Captain Dennis Oola.
He informed the court that Oola’s bail application has been pending since last year without being scheduled for hearing.
Besigye further stated that discussions on bail for all accused persons could not proceed until the issue of legal representation is conclusively addressed.
The session also saw the presiding judge, Justice Baguma, respond to claims circulating about his conduct.
Speaking off record, the judge dismissed allegations that he has previously avoided court proceedings.
He defended his record, citing what he described as a consistent commitment to judicial duty and humanitarian conduct.
Justice Baguma referenced a past incident involving Miriam Lutale, daughter of co-accused Hajji Obeid Lutale, who reportedly confronted the bench during proceedings.
The judge noted that although the situation could have led to contempt of court charges, he chose not to pursue punitive action.
He further told the accused that he has, on several occasions, visited suspects in Luzira Prison and remains open to addressing grievances through formal channels.
He urged parties to avoid confrontational approaches and instead seek resolution within the legal framework.
The court subsequently adjourned the matter to July 8, 2026, when a ruling is expected on issues arising from the human rights enforcement application.
The outcome is likely to shape the next phase of the trial, particularly on access to legal counsel and evidentiary procedures.