Lawyers want IGP case heard in open court

Sep 12, 2014

Journalists ask court to quash an order barring journalists from covering a case involving IGP, Kale Kayihura’s spy tapes.


By Michael Odeng & Betty Amamukirori

Journalists under their professional body, Uganda Court Reporters Association (UCRA) have asked the High Court to quash an order barring journalists from covering a case involving IGP, Kale Kayihura’s spy tapes.
 
Buganda Road Court Chief magistrate Lillian Buchyana on June 25 this year barred journalists from covering the case citing national security.

The case involves stolen tapes in which NRM party youth were interviewed in an ongoing investigation into an alleged plot to assassinate Kayihura.
 
Prior to the case, a police detective, Ronald Poteri was charged of wrongful communication and leaking confidential information concerning the investigations to Prime Minister’s wife, Jacqueline Mbabazi. 
 
The journalists filed a land mark judicial review at High Court, Civil division challenging the lower court’s order, saying the learned magistrate erred in law by not allowing the press to address court on the propriety of the exclusion order, hence amounting to unsubstantial derogation of the principle of open justice.  
 
On Thursday, UCRA lawyer, Isaac Ssemakadde told court presided over by Lydia Mugambe that common justice should be done in public, adding that secret courts are instruments of repression and enhance misconceptions of the judicial proceedings.
 
“The trial magistrate made a decision without laying the legal frameworks that govern the decision process,” he added.
Ssemakadde said the magistrate issued a ‘blanket ban’ without acknowledging the role of the media.
 
“There was abuse of jurisdiction. She (Buchyana) failed to take into account the relevant considerations before arriving at the ban order,” he said.
 
Meanwhile, the legal practitioner of Human Rights Network of Journalists (HRJ), Catherine Anite told court that there is an injunction against judicial officers not to hold criminal trials without the press.
 
“Had she given the press an opportunity to make submissions, this error of law could have been avoided,” she noted.
The Attorney General, Odoi Oburu submitted that the major purpose of the order was to protect prosecution witnesses from public treats and embarrassment.
 
Oburu said there was no basis for judicial review unless court finds that the magistrate violated the law.
However, Poteri’s lawyer led by Vincent Mugisha told court that Buchyana did not consider even the sureties and parents of the suspect.
 
“The ruling was so irregular, irrational and based on gut feelings because even the relatives of the suspect were not allowed to attend court proceedings,” Mugisha added. 
 
Mugisha said that a prosecution witness known as Anthony Mwesigye who was charged with simple robbery during trial confessed to them that he was forced to testify against the suspect for fear of his life.
 
“There was nothing to protect because the stories concerning the matter were already published by different media houses,” he added. Mugisha also said the trial magistrate violated freedom of press and expression. 

(adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});