State objects to bail for lawyer Eron Kiiza
Jailed lawyer Eron Kiiza appeares before the High Court Civil Division in Kampala for the hearing of a habeas corpus application seeking his release from prison, where he is serving a nine-month sentence handed down by the General Court Martial last month for alleged contempt of court. Photo | Abubaker Lubowa
What you need to know:
- The state, while responding to the bail application of Mr Kiiza, raised nine grounds, asking court to consider them and decline his bail application
The Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) has objected to the temporary release of jailed lawyer Eron Kiiza pending the hearing of his appeal challenging his nine months sentence over contempt of court.
The state, while responding to the bail application of Mr Kiiza, raised nine grounds, asking court to consider them and decline his bail application.
Among the grounds are that Mr Kiiza has not disclosed any exceptional circumstance to warrant his release, his sureties are not substantial with no control over him, and there will be no delay in disposing of his application.
The state further held that Mr Kiiza was found guilty of contempt of court and sentenced to nine months imprisonment in accordance with Sections 169(1)(g) and 211(9) of the Uganda Peoples’ Defence Forces Act, Cap 330.
“That the applicant being an advocate of the courts of law ought to have known about court decorum and acted in the manner expected of his standing in order to protect the dignity of the court process and his conviction reflects the need to protect the court process and underscores the necessity for a restrictive stance on bail in such matters to protect the integrity and decorum of court processes,” reads in part the court document.
In his sworn affidavit opposing the bail application, Mr Joseph Kyomuhendo, the chief state attorney, noted that Mr Kiiza has no right of appeal before the Court of Appeal, which has no jurisdiction to entertain his application.
“That in reply to paragraph 13 and 14 of the affidavit in support, the applicant’s right of appeal is prescribed by statute and it lies before the Court Martial Appeals Court and not before the High Court,” reads in part the court document.
Mr Kyomuhendo further noted that the Supreme Court’s decree in Constitutional Appeal No.02 of 2021 Attorney General Vs Hon Micheal A Kabaziguruka was only in respect of civilians tried under section 119(1)(g) now S. 117(1)(g) of the UPDF Act and not advocates found in contempt of court under sections 169(1)(g) and 212(9) of the UPDF Act.
In his application, Mr Kiiza noted that he filed an appeal in the Court of Appeal challenging his conviction and sentence, has a fixed place of abode, the offence he is convicted of did not involve personal violence, the appeal is not frivolous as it has a high chance of success, and has substantial sureties.
He claimed the nine-month sentence imposed on him by the defunct General Court Martial sitting in Makindye was illegal and unconstitutional. “It is unjust, inequitable, and against the tenets of constitutionalism, rule of law, and good governance for the applicant (Eron Kiiza) to continue in detention as a result of an illegal, unconstitutional conviction and sentence,” reads in part the court documents.
On January 7 this year, Mr Kiiza appeared before the General Court Martial as one of the lawyers representing Dr Besigye. He was subdued by soldiers on accusations of exhibiting gross professional misconduct when he allegedly confronted a court orderly while he guided him on where to sit in the court in a very highly charged environment before allegedly assaulting him. Then presiding chairman, Brig Gen Robert Freeman Mugabe without giving him a hearing, summarily convicted and sentenced him to nine months in prison at Kitalya where he has been ever since then.
But Kiiza contends that he is a beneficiary of the Supreme Court landmark ruling that clipped the powers of the General Courts-martial from trying civilians.
