Al. Col. (Rtd) Dr. Kizza Besigye and Another v Uganda (Criminal Miscellaneous Application No. 213 of 2026)
Observed later treatment
No later-treatment classification is recorded for this judgment.
Citator coverage is limited to judgments in the Wakilii corpus and source-matched treatment records. Absence of a signal is not an assertion that the case remains good law.
AI-generated summary. This summary was generated by AI from the full text of the judgment. It may contain errors or omissions—always read the source judgment before relying on it.
Holding
A bail application jointly filed by 13 law firms was dismissed for want of prosecution when applicants refused to proceed in the absence of two specific counsel, despite representation by multiple other advocates from the same firms. The court held that where an application is filed by 13 law firms, applicants cannot insist on the presence of one or two individual lawyers and their refusal to proceed amounted to abuse of court process.
Outcome
Bail application dismissed; applicants remain in custody
Facts
The applicants, who had been on remand for approximately 20 months in relation to Criminal Session Case No. 335 of 2025, filed a bail application jointly through 13 law firms. On 30 June 2026, the matter was fixed for hearing on 3 July 2026 in the presence of counsel for both parties, with Counsel Moses Tugume confirming readiness to receive fixtures. On the hearing date, none of the applicants' lawyers appeared. The first applicant informed the court of a crisis within their legal team that prevented them from prosecuting the application, stating they would not proceed without their lead counsel present. The applicants insisted on the presence of specific counsel despite being represented by 13 law firms comprising approximately 50 lawyers. The state opposed dismissal, arguing that the application was jointly instituted by 13 firms with similar responsibilities.
Issues
- Whether the applicants' bail application should be dismissed for want of prosecution when their counsel failed to appear on the hearing date despite representing them through 13 law firms.
Orders
- The bail application is dismissed for want of prosecution.
- The applicants should be availed with a hard copy of this ruling since they are in prison.
Rules and key headnotes
Legislation cited (7)
- Constitution of Uganda Article 23(6)
- Trial on Indictment Act Cap 25 s.15
- Trial on Indictment Act Cap 25 s.16
- Judicature (Criminal Procedure) (Applications) Rules SI 13-8 Rule 2
- Constitution (Bail Guidelines for Courts of Judicature) (Practice) (Directions) 2022
- Judicature Act Cap 16 s.37
- Judicature Act Cap 16 s.17(2)(a)
Full judgment
The original judgment as reported. Read the original PDF before relying on any passage.