The High Court has dismissed a human rights application filed by jailed opposition politician Dr Kizza Besigye and his co-accused, Obeid Lutale, challenging the alleged role of Chief of Defence Forces Gen Muhoozi Kainerugaba in the deportation of Kenyan lawyer Martha Karua and the arrest of Kampala Lord Mayor Erias Lukwago.

Acting High Court Judge Simon Peter M. Kinobe ruled on Tuesday that the applicants had not produced sufficient evidence linking Muhoozi directly to the immigration decision that prevented Karua from entering Uganda.

Besigye and Lutale had accused Muhoozi and the Attorney General of interfering with their constitutional right to legal representation and undermining the fairness of their ongoing criminal proceedings.
Their case partly relied on social media posts attributed to Muhoozi following Karua’s removal from Uganda.

In one post reportedly published on June 23, Muhoozi said he had personally taken responsibility for Karua’s deportation, adding that she was no longer permitted to enter Uganda.

The applicants also pointed to other statements attributed to Muhoozi concerning Besigye’s criminal case, arguing that the comments demonstrated that he was involved in actions against their defence team.

However, Justice Kinobe found that the social media statements, on their own, did not establish a sufficient evidential connection between Muhoozi and the decision made by immigration authorities.

The court further observed that there was no convincing evidence showing that Muhoozi had exercised legal authority over the immigration officers who handled Karua’s case or that those officials acted on his instructions.

Karua’s Entebbe ordeal
Karua, a former Kenyan Justice Minister and presidential candidate, has been part of Besigye and Lutale’s legal team since November 2024.

She travelled to Uganda on June 22 to participate in court proceedings involving the two men but was denied entry upon arrival at Entebbe International Airport.

In her account of the incident, Karua said she arrived on a Kenya Airways flight at approximately 8:50 a.m. with two other passengers, including the president of the Law Society of Kenya.

She said immigration officials initially stamped her passport but later separated her from the delegation and informed her that she could not enter Uganda because of unspecified security concerns.

Karua also alleged that officials took her two mobile phones before returning them later. She declined to accept the devices, expressing concern that confidential communications relating to Besigye’s defence could have been accessed.

She was subsequently issued with a notice identifying her as a prohibited immigrant, with persona non grata cited as the reason, before being returned to Nairobi.

Court directs applicants to judicial review
Besigye and Lutale had asked the High Court to reverse Karua’s exclusion and prevent the authorities from detaining, deporting or blocking her from entering Uganda whenever she travelled to represent them.

Justice Kinobe, however, said the human rights proceedings before him were not the proper mechanism for determining whether the immigration authorities had acted unlawfully.

The judge directed that any direct challenge to Karua’s exclusion should instead be pursued through judicial review.
Importantly, the ruling did not determine that Karua’s deportation or exclusion was lawful. It only found that Besigye and Lutale had used the wrong legal procedure to challenge the immigration decision.

The dismissal therefore leaves open the possibility of a separate judicial review challenge against the immigration authorities’ decision.