By KAMPALA – The High Court’s Civil Division has dismissed a habeas corpus application filed on behalf of prominent human rights lawyer Eron Kiiza, who is currently serving a nine-month prison sentence for contempt of the Court Martial.
The ruling, delivered on March 3, 2025, by Justice Douglas Singiza, has sparked frustration among Kiiza’s legal team, who are now seeking further legal clarification and recourse.
On February 25, 2025, Justice Singiza had informed Kiiza’s lawyers, George Musisi and Kato Tumusiime, during a private meeting in his chambers that the ruling would be delivered electronically—either via email or WhatsApp. This method had been previously used for a habeas corpus ruling concerning Dr. Kizza Besigye. However, despite these assurances, Kiiza’s lawyers appeared before the High Court expecting a formal pronouncement, only to find that their client, who was believed to be en route from Kitalya Prison for the ruling, remained detained.
The imprisonment of Kiiza has stirred widespread debate, particularly following a Supreme Court directive that cases transferred from the General Court Martial to civilian courts must be reviewed. His legal team argues that his case, having been appealed, should have been subject to this judicial review process.
Two habeas corpus applications had been submitted in relation to Kiiza’s detention:
- One filed by the Uganda Law Society against the Attorney General and the Commissioner General of Prisons.
- Another filed directly by Kiiza’s legal team, contesting the legality of his continued imprisonment.
Kiiza’s lawyers contend that his ongoing detention is unlawful, asserting that an appeal should have automatically stayed the execution of his sentence. With the dismissal of their application, they are now exploring additional legal avenues to challenge his incarceration and seek his release.
The case has drawn significant public attention, raising concerns over judicial independence and the rule of law in Uganda. Legal experts and human rights organizations continue to monitor developments closely, as the outcome of this case could set a precedent for similar legal battles in the future.
