pressug.com News 24 7
Related Articles
Viewers: 90,001
By Spy Uganda
The arrest of former Kampala Lord Mayor and senior advocate Erias Lukwago has triggered fresh political and constitutional debate in Uganda, with opposition leaders warning that the incident raises serious questions about the rule of law, judicial independence and Parliament’s ability to hold the Executive and security agencies accountable.
The Forum for Democratic Change (FDC) on Monday strongly condemned the operation that led to Lukwago’s arrest, describing it as an extrajudicial act intended to intimidate opposition politicians, lawyers and critics of government.
Addressing journalists during the party’s weekly press briefing at Najjanankumbi, FDC Vice President for Western Uganda Robert Centenary accused security agencies of bypassing established legal procedures and undermining constitutional safeguards.
“We have learnt of the abduction of former Lord Mayor Erias Lukwago,” Centenary said.
“We stand firmly against extrajudicial arrests, abductions and any form of enforced disappearance. If he has a case to answer, let him be arraigned before a court of law and let due process be followed.”
His remarks came hours after armed security personnel reportedly picked up Lukwago from his residence in Wakaliga, Kampala. Earlier in the day, Lukwago had posted on social media that security operatives had surrounded his home.
The arrest was later acknowledged by Chief of Defence Forces Gen. Muhoozi Kainerugaba through a post on X, but by Monday evening authorities had not publicly disclosed any charges against the veteran opposition politician and lawyer.
While political arrests have become a recurring feature of Uganda’s contentious political landscape, analysts say Lukwago’s detention has significance beyond the fate of one individual.
As one of the country’s most prominent opposition figures and a lawyer actively involved in high-profile constitutional and criminal litigation, his arrest touches on broader concerns about the independence of legal institutions and the protection of due process rights.
FDC argues that the incident represents an attempt to interfere with the administration of justice.
“In our opinion, this is an attack on the judicial system and on the rights of citizens who are presumed innocent until proven guilty,” Centenary said. “Government should allow the course of the law to take its natural path.”
The Constitution of Uganda guarantees the right to personal liberty under Article 23 and the right to a fair hearing under Article 28. The same constitutional framework requires that arrested persons be informed of the reasons for their arrest and be produced before a competent court within prescribed timelines.
Human rights advocates argue that these protections are weakened whenever security agencies conduct arrests without immediately disclosing charges or the location of detention.
The controversy has also revived questions about Parliament’s constitutional responsibility to oversee the Executive and ensure accountability within the security sector.
Under Articles 79 and 90 of the Constitution, Parliament is mandated to make laws for the peace, order and good governance of Uganda and exercise oversight over government institutions through committees, inquiries and debates.
Opposition legislators have frequently argued that unexplained arrests, prolonged detentions and alleged enforced disappearances represent not only human rights concerns but also a challenge to Parliament’s authority as the institution responsible for scrutinising government conduct.
Committees responsible for defence, internal affairs, legal affairs and human rights possess powers to summon ministers, military commanders and other public officials to explain actions taken by state agencies.
However, critics contend that recommendations arising from parliamentary investigations often fail to result in meaningful accountability.
The arrest of Lukwago is therefore likely to renew calls for legislators to demand explanations from security agencies regarding the legal basis of the operation.
Political observers note that Parliament’s effectiveness in exercising oversight has increasingly become a subject of public debate, particularly in cases involving politically sensitive arrests and national security operations.
The political sensitivity surrounding Lukwago’s arrest is heightened by his prominent role in ongoing legal proceedings involving veteran opposition leader Dr. Kizza Besigye.
Lukwago is among the lawyers representing Besigye in treason-related proceedings that have attracted national and international attention.
In recent weeks, he has publicly challenged aspects of the prosecution’s case while simultaneously pursuing legal action against statements made by Gen. Muhoozi Kainerugaba that the defence team argues could undermine constitutional guarantees of a fair trial.
“We all know that this is politically motivated because the trial of our founding party president Dr. Kizza Besigye was meant to have commenced last week,” Centenary said.
“Government will not be comfortable because it is going to be exposed even more.”
The High Court recently directed Gen. Muhoozi and other respondents to file responses in proceedings arising from complaints lodged by Besigye’s legal team, placing Lukwago at the centre of one of Uganda’s most closely watched legal battles.
While government has not linked the arrest to those proceedings, opposition leaders insist the timing inevitably raises questions.
Government and security agencies have consistently defended strong law-enforcement operations as necessary to preserve national security and public order.
Officials have previously argued that all arrests conducted by security organs are guided by law and informed by intelligence assessments.
However, opposition politicians and civil society organisations continue to express concern over what they describe as increasing reliance on military-style operations against political actors.
Human rights groups argue that where criminal allegations exist, authorities should issue summonses, effect transparent arrests and promptly produce suspects before courts.
“Stop intimidating the lawyers, the suspects and citizens of this country,” Centenary said. “Let the law lead the entire process.”
The debate reflects a broader tension that has characterised Uganda’s governance landscape for years: balancing state security interests against constitutional freedoms and civil liberties.
Reacting to the arrest of Advocate Erias Lukwago, concerned Ugandan citizen Patrick Ssekabira expressed alarm over what he described as a disturbing pattern of targeting opposition figures and their associates.
“First it was Muhoozi abducting Eddy Mutwe and treating him brutally for supporting Bobi Wine. Then Barbie Kyagulanyi was attacked and later hospitalised for being the wife of Bobi Wine,” Ssekabira wrote on X (formerly Twitter).
He added: “Now former Lord Mayor Erias Lukwago has been abducted, and Muhoozi claims he is in his basement being taught Swahili. If leaders meant to protect citizens are instead accused of intimidating them, that is what many people call impunity.”
In a strongly worded open letter to Chief of Defence Forces General Muhoozi Kainerugaba, Ronald Agaba Jr issued a pointed warning about the long-term consequences of such actions. “The same history you ignore is watching. Dictators and their enforcers who weaponised the military against lawyers, opposition figures, and citizens have always ended in disgrace, their legacies stained with blood, their names cursed by generations. You are repeating that deadly script in real time,”
Agaba wrote.He continued: “You are not protecting Uganda, you are endangering it. Every act of impunity like this plants deeper seeds of resentment and resistance. The people see what you are doing. The world sees it. History is recording every boast, every blindfold, every raid. The day of reckoning always comes for those who confuse military force with personal immunity.”
Ultimately, Lukwago’s arrest has become more than a political controversy. It is emerging as a test of how Uganda’s institutions, including Parliament, the Judiciary and oversight bodies, respond when allegations of executive overreach arise.
For Parliament in particular, the incident presents another opportunity to demonstrate whether its oversight mandate extends beyond approving budgets and passing legislation to actively scrutinising the conduct of powerful state agencies.
Whether legislators demand answers, whether security agencies provide legal justification and whether courts are allowed to independently adjudicate any resulting cases may shape public confidence in Uganda’s democratic institutions.
As the country awaits official clarification on the reasons for Lukwago’s detention, the episode has once again thrust questions of accountability, constitutionalism and the separation of powers into the national spotlight.
For supporters, critics and neutral observers alike, the issue is no longer merely about the arrest of Erias Lukwago. It is about whether Uganda’s institutions can uphold the principles of due process and the rule of law when political tensions are at their highest.
, https://www.spyuganda.com/rule-of-law-or-rule-of-gun-lukwago-arrest-puts-ugandas-democratic-institutions-to-test/
