Besigye's Lawyer Challenges Prosecutor on Legal Basis for Witness Protection in Treason Trial

A heated exchange lit up the courtroom in the ongoing treason trial of Dr. Kizza Besigye and co-accused Obied Lutale and Capt. Denis Oola. Defence counsel Frederick Mpanga, part of Besigye’s team alongside Ernest Kalibala and Erias Lukwago, launched a sharp cross-examination against Chief State Attorney Joseph Kyomuhendo.

Presiding Justice Emmanuel Baguma oversaw proceedings as the state, represented by Richard Birivumbuka and George Bigirwa, sought to shield key witnesses’ identities without live streaming or oaths for prior affidavits.

Mpanga probed Kyomuhendo’s 15 years as a prosecutor and head of the DPP’s Anti-Corruption Unit, pressing him on his expertise in witness protection. Kyomuhendo admitted experience but faltered when pressed on whether he testified as a witness of fact or law, eventually conceding both.

The lawyer hammered home that applications rely solely on affidavits, questioning if the state’s lacked sufficient evidence. He highlighted Kyomuhendo’s prior involvement in Besigye cases.

Challenged on statutes, Kyomuhendo cited Article 28 of the Constitution for fair hearing rights, referencing the Constitutional Court case Suni Yuni v Attorney General. He argued it implies witness protection as a limit on disclosure, though no explicit provision exists.

Mpanga countered fiercely, noting Article 28’s sub-clauses—like 2(c) on defence preparation—favour accused persons, not state witnesses. Kyomuhendo struggled to pinpoint direct references, leading to pointed exchanges on cross-examination rules.

The cross-examination continues the next day, spotlighting debates over fair trial rights versus witness safety.

Source: Daily Monitor (Uganda)