State targets exiled Kakwenza’s sureties

Days after issuing an arrest warrant against exiled novelist Kakwenza Rukirabashaija, Buganda Road Court has moved against his sureties, who now face jail.

According to his lawyers, Mr Kakwenza fled the country in fear of further torture and in the quest for effective medication. 

They also say Kakwenza had a burning desire to rule out poisoning from the injections he allegedly received when he was held incommunicado.

ALSO READ: Kakwenza and Nyanzi are a warning of woes yet to come

According to his lawyer, Mr Eron Kiiza, Mr Kakwenza also fled the “oppressive criminal justice system.”

At the centre of the trial is Buganda Road Chief Magistrate Douglas Singiza, who remanded the tortured Kakwenza on January 11.

“The question on everyone’s lips was what would befall the sureties? Dr Singiza answered it. Jail beckons! It didn’t have to be like this. The State could have tried Kakwenza in his absence or allowed him to stand trial digitally, say by zoom, like he did while tortured from Kitalya Mini Max Prison,” Mr Kiiza says.

Article 28(5) of the Constitution allows an accused to consent to trial in his absence. 

Uganda has passed laws and the Judiciary has policies and equipment for electronic trials.

“The court has chosen to harass the sureties to send a message of intimidation to anyone who decides to stand surety to a government critic. It is that simple” Mr Kiiza adds.

Mr Kakwenza’s sureties are National Unity Platform party secretary general Lewis Rubongoya, lawyer Julius Galisonga, Ms Annah Ashaba, a teacher, and activist Job Kiija.

RELATED: Kakwenza: How he slipped out of Uganda, vows to return

Court issued criminal summons against the lawyer, alleging a non-existent offense of offensive communication, and other sureties. The court has since backtracked on the criminal summons following demands by the defendant’s lawyers for disclosure of the non-existent charge sheet and police statements relevant to the sureties’ case.

The magistrate, according to documents seen by Sunday Monitor, withdrew the summons, casting the same as a mistake.

“It is important to note that the threat to arrest sureties was recast in a different form—a court document called notice to show cause why the sureties shouldn’t be arrested for failure to produce Kakwenza.

“It is wrong to criminalise standing surety for another. Without a crime or charges, the State and the court shouldn’t threaten arrests. It is outrageous to go after sureties with hostility in order to settle scores with an accused, who slipped through borders and expressed anger about the magistrate, who blinded himself to his torture and worsened it with jail/remand time,” lawyer Kiiza opines.

ALSO READ: Torture: We have learnt nothing from history

Mr Kiiza argues that the court never barred Mr Kakwenza from travelling, but simply held his passport. 
He argues that his client could travel in East Africa without one and that it is possible to move beyond the region on other arrangements.

“It is the duty of the State to guard the borders of Uganda from illegal entry and exits. If the State didn’t want him to cross borders, they should have stopped him. They failed,” Mr Kiiza notes.

He further says by standing surety, a person doesn’t shoulder the State responsibility of guarding borders and managing the human flow in and out of a country. The reasonable thing, he adds, would be to hear from sureties and if necessary, give them reasonable time to mobilise the Shs40m the State is entitled to.

Background...Kakwenza case
Kakwenza was accused of using social media to insult President Museveni and his son, also the commander of the Lands Forces in the Uganda People’s Defence Forces.