Bobi Wine versus Supreme Court

Legal experts react

The comments of the chief justice reacting to Kyagulanyi’s accusations of bias towards the first respondent of the petition, President Museveni, have been under scrutiny by legal experts and the general public. Owiny-Dollo has since been sharply rebuked for his comments from the bench. Most ire was drawn by the mention of ‘Plan B’ a reference to a political phrase used by former presidential candidate Dr. Kizza Besigye when he bowed out of the 2021 race back in August 2020.

Erias Lukwago, the Kampala Lord Mayor, who was initially part of Kyagulanyi’s lawyers, has been acerbic in his criticism of Owiny-Dollo. On his Twitter page, Lukwago accused the chief justice of having “facilitated an abortion or miscarriage of justice.”

Wandera Ogalo, a lawyer and commentator on legal matters however says not every exchange in court should be obsessed over. “You cannot have running commentary on every ping pong between an advocate and a judge,” he responded to The Independent in a query on what the back and forth between Kyagulanyi and Owiny-Dollo means for the Supreme Court at this point in time.

“That cannot be indicative of anything on the Supreme Court. One can make a comment about the matter when the case is done. That Kyagulanyi made a mistake here or so and so did this…” Ogalo said.

He added, “Judges ask questions, we (lawyers) give answers. That is normal.” On Feb. 24, lawyers of Kyagulanyi led by Medard Sseggona filed the withdrawal papers at the Supreme Court.

“We are just waiting for the hearing,” Sseggona told The Independent a day after filing. He also commented on the chief justice’s remarks on his client. “That was very unbecoming if he said that. Plan B is a political thing. But I did not hear him say that.”

Kyagulanyi had earlier rankled the Supreme Court when he announced at a press conference that he did not have confidence in three justices of the Supreme Court; Owiny Dollo, Mike Chibita and Ezekiel Muhanguzi. Kyagulanyi said Owiny-Dollo and Chibita have worked closely with Museveni in the past while Muhanguzi could not be trusted because he is a relative of the Minister of Security Elly Tumwine.

Solomon Muyita, the communications manager of the judiciary could not comment on the chief justice’s reference to plan B. “Statements made during court proceedings cannot be reduced to news statements. They stay on the court file,” he told The Independent.

In the same week, the judiciary had to react quickly to a social media blizzard after news went viral that the chief justice and the principal judge were in a “secret meeting” with the President at State House. The judiciary put out a statement about a swearing in ceremony of a new judge at State House that the principals had to attend.

Kyagulanyi team divided

Sources in Kyagulanyi’s party, the National Unity Platform (NUP) say there was internal division on the matter of going to court. Some members of the party were opposed to the idea of going to court at a time when security agents were abducting NUP supporters and torturing them.

An estimated 200 supporters of the party are said to be in detention in unknown places after abduction by security forces. Violence was meted out on Kyagulanyi’s team all through the campaign leading to the Jan.14 elections and scores of their supporters were shot dead in November while protesting the arrest of Kyagulanyi in the midst of the presidential campaign.

An example is Umar Kagimu who was doing stationery production for the party. He was abducted from his workplace on Nasser Road in Kampala on Jan. 21 by people said to be security operatives. They drove to his home and ransacked it.  His wife, Lydia Nassolo, told The Independent that they were over 30 military men. She says he was tortured by security forces. He was held incommunicado at Makindye military barracks in Kampala and released by the Makindye military court on Feb. 18 after almost a month in detention.

Some felt that the party was better served if lawyers worked to secure the release of people like Kagimu who have been missing for months.

Despite the ongoing harassment of its members, another faction of the party believed that the petition in the Supreme Court had a chance of finding sympathy among the justices.

But Lewis Rubongoya, the secretary general of NUP and one of its chief strategists, while appearing on a talk show on NTV on Feb. 25 said gathering evidence for the petition was a difficult process because of state harassment.

“We went through a lot of hardships trying to access our people who are incarcerated in Kitaya [prison]. When we were eventually allowed to see them, I was only able to interview two out of thirty people we intended to interview.”

The NRM lawyer on the other hand, Enoch Barata, appearing on the same show said the NUP team was unprepared for the exercise. “When you go to court, you go to prove your case, he said, “You don’t go to court to have it prove itself to you. If you are not good enough to argue a case then please do not go to court.”