In a case that has ignited passionate debate over judicial fairness and the limits of free expression, prominent human rights lawyer Eron Kiiza returned to the High Court’s Criminal Division today for his highly anticipated bail ruling.
The courtroom was filled to capacity with lawyers, activists and well-wishers all eager to witness what many have dubbed a defining moment for Uganda’s legal landscape.
Eron Kiiza, best known for his relentless advocacy for political activist Dr. Kizza Besigye is currently serving a nine-month prison sentence at Kitalya for contempt of the General Court Martial.
His detention has sparked outrage among human rights defenders, who argue that the charge is a veiled attempt to suffocate opposition and intimidate legal practitioners.
Kiiza’s troubles began after he criticized the General Court Martial’s handling of certain politically sensitive cases.
In what some see as a heavy handed response, the military court found him in contempt sentencing him to nine months behind bars.
He has since applied for bail pending the resolution of his appeal before the General Court Martial’s appeals division.
Today’s hearing saw a robust legal team led by prominent lawyers Nicholas Opiyo and George Musisi with several scholars and human rights defenders also in attendance.
They argue that Kiiza’s imprisonment is not just about contempt, it is symbol of the broader struggle for judicial independence in Uganda.
The DPP (Directorate of Public Prosecutions), however, has opposed the bail application citing the gravity of the offense and the need to uphold court dignity.
“Contempt of court is a serious matter. Granting bail would set a dangerous precedent,” the DPP’s representative stated.
The case has drawn widespread media attention not only because of Kiiza’s high profile clientele but also because it raises critical questions about the rule of law.
Presiding judge Michael Elubu is expected to deliver a ruling that could either reinforce or challenge the prevailing perception of judicial bias. If granted bail, it would signal a victory for those advocating judicial impartiality. If denied, it could further inflame concerns about judicial overreach.
Social media platforms have been abuzz with mixed reactions. Some users support the court’s firm stance, arguing that no one is above the law. Others view the charge as a thinly veiled attempt to silence a vocal critic of the regime.
“If defending human rights is now a crime, what hope do we have?”
