On 15 June 2026, heavily armed security operatives from the Uganda People’s Defence Forces Special Forces Command arrested prominent human rights lawyer and opposition figure Erias Lukwago at his residence in Kampala, Uganda. He was taken to an undisclosed location, and his whereabouts remained unknown for more than 48 hours, amounting to an enforced disappearance. During this period, General Muhoozi Kainerugaba, Chief of Defence Forces and son of President Yoweri Museveni, publicly claimed responsibility on social media, stating he had “captured” Lukwago and taken him to his “basement.”
On 17 June, Lukwago was transferred to Kira Division Police Station in Wakiso District and then produced before the Buganda Road Chief Magistrate’s Court in Kampala. He was charged with “misprision of treason” under Section 25 of the Penal Code Act, which means failing to report alleged knowledge of plans to commit treason, an offence carrying a potential life sentence. He denied the charge and was remanded to Luzira Prison. A bail application filed on health grounds was rejected on 7 July 2026, and he has remained in detention since.
Lukwago, President of the People’s Front for Freedom and a well-known defender of due process and fair trial rights, was arrested while serving as legal counsel for opposition leader Dr Kizza Besigye, who faces treason charges.
The continued arbitrary detention of Erias Lukwago intensifies a climate of fear among lawyers, human rights defenders, opposition actors, and independent media. As a senior advocate representing high-profile critics, his prolonged detention on misprision of treason charges after an enforced disappearance signals that providing legal counsel to government opponents carries a personal risk of abduction, incommunicado detention, and politically motivated prosecution. This directly constrains the ability of civil society organisations and individuals to access independent legal representation, defend fundamental rights, or challenge state actions through the courts. The event also reinforces the expanding role of the military in civilian law-enforcement functions and the use of broad criminal provisions against perceived dissent, further eroding an open and responsive state and a supportive legal framework.