HIGH COURT DISMISSES LUKWAGO BAIL APPLICATION CITING COMMITTAL FOR TRIAL

Lawyer Erias Lukwago Appearing Before the Court. File Photo.

URN

The High Court Criminal Division has dismissed a bail application filed by city lawyer Erias Lukwago, ruling that it had been overtaken by events following his committal to the High Court for trial on a charge of misprision of treason.

In a ruling delivered on Thursday, Justice David Matovu declined to release Lukwago on bail, holding that the application was filed in relation to Makindye Chief Magistrate’s Court Criminal Case No. 0762 of 2026, which ceased to exist after the accused was committed to the High Court on July 16, 2026.

The judge further ruled that no High Court judge had yet been assigned the newly committed criminal session case, making it inappropriate for him to determine the bail application.

“In the final result, and considering the missing medical report duly certified by a person authorized in law, and also the fact that this application was filed in relation to Makindye Chief Magistrates Court Criminal Case No. 0762 of 2026, which case no longer exists, this court will exercise its discretion by not granting bail in order to give whichever judge will be allocated this matter the opportunity to effectively manage the case,” Justice Matovu ruled.

The court directed the Deputy Registrar of the Criminal Division to expedite the allocation of Lukwago’s criminal session case to a judge for further case management.

Lukwago, one of the defence lawyers in the ongoing treason trial involving retired Colonel Dr. Kiiza Besigye and others, was charged on June 17, 2026, before the Makindye Chief Magistrate’s Court with misprision of treason, an offence he denied.

His initial application for bail before the Chief Magistrate was rejected, although the court ordered that he be taken to Mulago National Referral Hospital for specialised medical assessment.

Following the medical evaluation, Lukwago petitioned the High Court for bail on July 8, arguing that he suffers from several chronic and life-threatening illnesses, including hypertension, cylindrical bronchiectasis, irreversible persistent anosmia and tinnitus, residual cervical radiculitis, gastroesophageal reflux disease, and hiatus hernia.

Medical reports presented to court showed that a team of five consultants at Mulago National Referral Hospital recommended, among other interventions, a spinal review and specialised treatment by his primary spine surgeons in India.

Lukwago argued that prison medical facilities could not adequately manage his condition and that continued detention posed a serious risk to his health.

He also told the court that he has a fixed place of residence in Bulwa Zone, Wakaliga, Rubaga Division, Kampala, and presented four sureties to guarantee his appearance in court.

The sureties were Katumba Chrisestom, the managing partner of Lukwago & Co. Advocates; Abdul Sewankambo, Lukwago’s elder brother and businessman; Mukono Municipality Member of Parliament Betty Bakireke Nambooze; and former Rubaga North MP Moses Kasibante.

Justice Matovu found all four sureties to be substantial and noted that they met the requirements under the Constitution (Bail Guidelines for Courts of Judicature) (Practice) Directions, 2022.

He observed that the prosecution had not challenged their suitability and that each understood the responsibilities of standing surety. The judge also agreed that Lukwago has a fixed place of abode and reiterated that under Article 23(6)(a) of the Constitution, every accused person is presumed innocent and has the constitutional right to apply for bail.

However, Justice Matovu found shortcomings in the medical evidence relied upon by the applicant, ruling that although the reports from Mulago National Referral Hospital detailed Lukwago’s health challenges, they were not accompanied by certification from an authorised medical officer of the Uganda Prisons Service confirming that prison medical facilities were incapable of providing the required treatment.

He directed that Lukwago’s medical reports be forwarded to prison authorities to facilitate appropriate medical care and said that if prison authorities find themselves unable to manage his condition, they should make an appropriate report.

The prosecution, through an affidavit sworn by Chief State Attorney Joseph Kyomuhendo, opposed the application, arguing that Lukwago’s health could be managed within the prison system, that his sureties were insufficient, and that he posed a flight risk because of the gravity of the charge. The State also argued that he could interfere with witnesses.

Justice Matovu rejected the prosecution’s arguments on flight risk and witness interference, describing them as speculative. He observed that investigations appeared to have been completed and that the prosecution had already begun presenting evidence in the related treason case.

Despite those findings, he held that the application could not succeed because it had been overtaken by Lukwago’s committal to the High Court and because the criminal session case had not yet been allocated to a trial judge.

The ruling was delivered through the Judiciary’s Electronic Court Case Information Management System (ECCMIS). Lukwago was committed to the High Court earlier this month after the Makindye Chief Magistrate’s Court concluded that police investigations had been completed.

According to an indictment signed by Assistant Director of Public Prosecutions Thomas Jatiko, Lukwago is accused of failing to report information relating to an alleged plot to overthrow the Government of Uganda between 2021 and November 2024.

The prosecution alleges that, as president of the People’s Front for Freedom, he knew that opposition figures, including Dr. Kizza Besigye, Hajji Obeid Lutale, Joel Wakhaima and Frank Kiherere Atukunda, allegedly intended to commit treason but neither informed the authorities nor took reasonable steps to prevent the alleged offences.

The offence of misprision of treason, contrary to Section 25 of the Penal Code Act, criminalises the failure to promptly report knowledge of intended treason to the relevant authorities.