High Court, yesterday, ruled that it would continue with the trial of Victoire Ingabire with or without her presence in court.Ingabire, who is facing three charges, had on Monday notified court that she would boycott her trial for the rest of the proceedings, citing lack of judicial independence. She is accused of threatening state security, Genocide denial and promoting ethnic division.Ingabire had also instructed her lawyers to stay away on grounds that the  prosecution seized some documents from a cell of a defence witness, Lt. Col. Michel Habimana.The witness, who is a former spokesperson of FDLR, is serving a life sentence handed to him by a Gacaca court for his role in the 1994 Genocide against the Tutsi.Prosecution had earlier watered down Ingabire’s reasons to boycott the court proceedings, arguing that  her decision was a result of embarrassment due to the overwhelming evidence against her. Defence witness, Habimana, claimed some documents were seized from his cell without his consent.Responding to the claims, Prosecutor General Martin Ngoga said there was no law that was violated as the defence may claim."What happened is that the prison authority acting on our request conducted a search in the prison cell where a prisoner witness stays. The document was discovered and it was produced in court to make a point about suspected irregular contacts prior to the testimony."There were reasonable grounds to believe the testimony had been irregularly pre-arranged. The document was seized, not stolen and it was produced in Court,” said Ngoga."This defendant has been through her prolonged defence for months and the allegations against the judiciary cannot be a new discovery when the case is almost over. It is not unprecedented that defendants boycott trials in national and international courts,” said NgogaHabimana was first invited to court on April 4, as a defence witness for Ingabire but court demanded for his complete identity, from whence it was identified that he was serving a life sentence and had lost his civil liberties.The prosecutor, therefore, submitted that Habimana could not give sworn evidence as a credible witness before court. Having lost his civil liberties, Habimana has been testifying under no oath, meaning he was not to be held liable for anything he said in court.Court agreed. However, Habimana was able to be heard as a court informer. Prosecution had requested the judge to either force Ingabire to return to court or appoint a special lawyer to represent her interest as it happened in the case of Jean Bosco Barayagwiza at the International Criminal Tribunal for Rwanda (ICTR) in Arusha, Tanzania.Barayagwiza boycotted the ICTR and the court appointed a special defence counsel to represent him all through the proceedings until his conviction and sentencing.He is currently serving a 32-year prison sentence. However, yesterday, Justice Marie Theresa Mukakarisa, rejected both prosecution’s requests and said the hearing would continue in her absence if she so wishes."The law provides that if one of the parties in court is summoned and does not appear in court, the proceedings continue without them. In this case, the court registrar will inform Ingabire whenever her case is due and it is upon her to decide on whether she wants to come or not but she will not be forced to come to court,” Mukakarisa ruled. According to the judge, jurisprudence set in Barayagwiza’s trial cannot apply in Ingabire’s case, considering the fact that the former announced the boycott in the initial stages of the trial."Ingabire’s case is different. The charges have been read to her and she has defended herself on them. There is no need for a special lawyer for her,” ruled Mukakarisa.The court will resume on Monday with prosecution making their final submission and seeking sentence against the accused.