Uganda’s opposition politics escalated on Wednesday after the People’s Front for Freedom (PFF) accused the judiciary of running a “highly choreographed” process against veteran opposition figure Dr Kizza Besigye following his latest court appearance.
In a statement released after the session, the party alleged that the proceedings were designed to secure a predetermined outcome against Besigye and his co-accused, Hajji Obeid Lutale.
Central to the dispute was the issue of legal representation, which the opposition claims was handled irregularly.
“The regime through its cadre judge Baguma continues to play out a highly choreographed and desperate script aimed at a predetermined conviction,” the PFF said.
According to the party, a list of 786 state-appointed lawyers was presented to the accused, with court officials later claiming they had failed to make a selection.
The presiding judge subsequently assigned three lawyers to represent them, a move the opposition strongly criticised.
“A list of 786 ‘state brief’ lawyers was dumped on our leaders… Baguma then imposed three state-appointed lawyers,” the statement read, questioning the credibility of the assigned counsel.
Besigye reportedly rejected the arrangement in court, arguing that it was unreasonable to choose legal representation within a short timeframe without access to the lawyers’ qualifications or professional background.
“He laughed at the expectation to choose legal representation in under 24 hours without knowing the CVs or specialties of the state’s lawyers,” the party stated.
The opposition leader also raised concerns over public spending, questioning why the state would fund legal representation for individuals capable of hiring their own lawyers, particularly amid reports of hardship in parts of the country.
“He questioned why the state is wasting taxpayers’ money on state briefs for people who can afford their own lawyers while parts of Uganda are suffering from a severe hunger crisis,” the statement added.
The PFF further alleged procedural breaches during the hearing, claiming that case disclosures were issued while the accused were still in the dock, with witnesses allegedly prepared to proceed immediately.
“In total disregard of standard legal procedures, Baguma ordered that the accused be served case disclosures right there in the dock,” the party claimed.
Following resistance from the defence, the court allowed a 14-day window for the accused to either select lawyers from the state list or appoint their own team.
The trial is scheduled to proceed on July 29, 2026, as a separate High Court application on legal representation remains pending.