Prosecution Accuses Besigye, Co-Accused of Threatening Witnesses

The prosecution in the treason case against veteran opposition politician Kizza Besigye has accused him and his co-accused of threatening state witnesses, as the hearing continues on an application seeking to conceal the identities of prosecution witnesses. The allegations emerged on Wednesday during the cross-examination of Chief State Attorney Joseph Kyomuhendo, who swore an affidavit supporting an application to conceal the identities of six out of ten witnesses the state intends to rely on in the case against Besigye, his aide Hajji Obeid Lutale, and Captain Denis Oola.

The court, presided over by Criminal Division Judge Emmanuel Baguma, heard Kyomuhendo allege that the accused persons, through an alleged accomplice identified as Frank Kihehere, had issued threats to harm prosecution witnesses. Kyomuhendo told the court that the threats were actual and existed in electronic format, adding that they were identified with the help of a forensic expert whose identity he declined to disclose.

He further stated that Kihehere allegedly issued threats to all six witnesses the prosecution now seeks to protect. According to Kyomuhendo, the alleged threats amount to intimidation and interference with the case, arguing that Besigye and his co-accused are likely to cause harm to the witnesses and their loved ones. However, during intense cross-examination by defense lawyers, including Erias Lukwago, Bayan Turinawe, and Ernest Kalibala, Kyomuhendo struggled to provide details about the origin of the alleged threats and how they were handled. 

He declined to reveal how the electronic evidence was stored, downloaded, or transcribed, and refused to name the individuals involved in the process. The defense pressed for disclosure of the alleged threatening material, but the prosecution maintained it would not reveal its sources. Kyomuhendo told the court that his knowledge of the alleged threats was derived from reviewing the police file and information provided by his supervisors at the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions.

He also told Judge Baguma that he was unsure whether any of the allegedly threatened witnesses had formally reported the threats to police. Kyomuhendo, who also heads the Anti-Human Trafficking Division in the Office of the DPP, further stated that he could not confirm whether the witnesses were currently in hiding. He also questioned whether Besigye’s lawyers intended to “hunt down” the witnesses after learning their identities and whereabouts.

The prosecutor maintained that revealing such details could prejudice the case and jeopardize witness safety. He further insisted that, to his knowledge, there were no other accomplices involved beyond Kihehere and maintained that the alleged threats were linked to Besigye and his co-accused. During the proceedings, Kyomuhendo also suggested that even Besigye himself could be among individuals the prosecution may consider for witness protection, although he did not elaborate further.

On witness protection measures, Kyomuhendo informed the court that the state has several options available, including remote testimony through video link, concealed witness booths, voice distortion, and physical shielding. He added that witnesses can also be placed in secure shelters, assigned bodyguards, and given strict guidance on their movements and interactions.

The defense lawyers, however, questioned the timing of the application. They argued that although the alleged threats reportedly emerged in 2025, the prosecution only filed its application in March 2026, more than two months after an order requiring disclosure of evidence had already been issued.

Kyomuhendo responded that the witnesses had been safe until that time, but struggled to explain why similar protection measures could not be implemented without concealing their identities. Defense lawyer Bayan Turinawe also faulted the prosecution for failing to promptly fix the application for hearing, noting that the matter was instead scheduled by the judge in the interest of expediting justice.

The defense further argued that the delay in filing the application despite alleged threats dating back to January amounted to negligence. They also criticized the prosecution for presenting the application without an investigator’s report to substantiate the extent of the alleged threats. In additional testimony, Kyomuhendo was questioned on international standards, United Nations guidelines, and other protocols regarding witness protection.

He also told the court that arms trafficking can form part of a treason offence, in response to questions regarding the nature of the charges against Besigye, Lutale, and Captain Oola. The marathon cross-examination, which resumed at around 10 am on Wednesday, was still ongoing at the time of publishing this story. Lawyer Major Simon Nsubuga, representing Captain Denis Oola, is also expected to cross-examine Kyomuhendo after lawyers for Besigye and Lutale conclude their submissions.

Wednesday marked the second day of Kyomuhendo’s cross-examination. Assistant Director of Public Prosecutions Thomas Jatiko, Chief State Attorney Richard Birivumbuka, and Senior State Attorney George Bigirwa are representing the state in the matter. Besigye, Lutale, and Captain Oola are jointly charged with treason over allegations that they plotted to overthrow the government.

Prosecutors allege that the trio held meetings in Geneva, Athens, Nairobi, and Kampala to solicit funds, acquire weapons, and organize paramilitary operations. According to the state, Besigye allegedly met a Kurdish intelligence agent identified as Andrew Wilson and received 5,000 US dollars to facilitate the transport of 36 Ugandan recruits to Kisumu, Kenya, for military training.

The recruits were reportedly intercepted and deported before the training could begin. The prosecution further alleges that Besigye sought surface-to-air missiles, ricin poison, counterfeit currency, and planned to use drone technology to assassinate President Yoweri Museveni. The state says it possesses audio and video recordings, social media messages, immigration documents, and phone logs linking the accused persons to the alleged plot.