The Military Tribunal yesterday rejected a plea by Brig Gen Frank Rusagara’s lawyer Emmanuel Ntambara challenging the court’s competence to try his client saying that the accused is a civilian who can’t stand trial in a military court.

Also appearing before the Military Tribunal was Col. Tom Byabagamba and retired sergeant François Kabayiza, who are charged with different counts, some jointly, others individual.

The presiding judge, Lt. Col. Chance Ndagano, premised on the fact that, there is a link between the retired soldiers and Col. Byabagamba, to decide that the court has the competence to try Rusagara and Kabayiza.

Earlier, Ntambara had told court that: "My client is a retired soldier who is being tried in a military court yet he is a civilian. The law stipulates that the only civilian who can be court-martialed is an ex-soldier accused of committing genocide at a time when he was in service–which he is not.”The same view was held by Kabayiza’s lawyer, who also requested that his client’s case be transferred to civilian courts.

This prompted prosecution to challenge the defendants saying that as long as a civilian is accused of being complicit in a criminal case that involves a serving soldier, they can be court-martialled.

"Defence is ignoring the fact that when a civilian commits a crime with a soldier, they are tried by military courts. When Rusagara and Kabayiza took guns from Rusagara’s home to Byabagamba’s, who also accepted to hide the two guns in his house, this links the suspects together,” argued Lt. Faustin Nzakamwita, the prosecutor.

Charges read

After the judge pronounced himself on the particular application by defence, the latter said they would appeal.

All the three defendants were present during the hearing.

Meanwhile, earlier in the hearing, charges against the accused were mentioned, where Rusagara was accused of; inciting insurrection or trouble amongst the population, committing an act aimed at tarnishing the image of the country or the government, and illegal possession of firearms.

Byabagamba was charged with wilfully concealing evidence in a criminal case, inciting insurrection or trouble among the population and committing an act aimed at tarnishing the image of the country, while Kabayiza was accused of wilfully concealing evidence in a criminal case.

No date was set for the appeal which is supposed to be heard by the Military High Court.