By KT Reporter
The Deputy President of the National Unity Platform (NUP) for Northern Uganda, Dr Lina Zedriga, has been granted bail by the Gulu Chief Magistrate’s Court.
Dr Zedriga was released on Tuesday afternoon on a cash bail of one million Shillings after appearing before Chief Magistrate Augustine Alule Koma. The court also bonded her four sureties at a non-cash bail of 10 million Shillings each. She is expected to return to court on March 24.
Earlier in the proceedings, State Prosecutor Patricia Edyedo objected to the sureties presented by the defence, arguing that they were not substantial. The proposed sureties were Kelly Komakech, Sicondo Okot Abok, Sr Florence Bernadette, and Fr Aquilino Acidri.
In her submission, the prosecutor contended that the first and fourth sureties, Komakech and Okot, were friends and colleagues of the accused. She further noted that one of them is facing a charge related to violence. According to the prosecution, friends and colleagues of the accused were likely to share the same ideology and might therefore be less able to act objectively as officers of the court.
The State also objected to Sr Florence Bernadette and Fr Aquilino Acidri, described as relatives of the accused, arguing that they would not be able to exercise sufficient control should Dr Zedriga abscond. The prosecutor added that the clergy had not presented formal recommendation letters from their religious superiors.
“There is no proof that these individuals are in current good standing with their respective missions, and if they are transferred, it would be very difficult for this honourable court to trace them,” Edyedo submitted. She also cited what she described as an “irreconcilable conflict of interest” between their roles as spiritual leaders and their relationship with the accused.
On those grounds, the prosecution asked the court to deny bail to the 64-year-old former magistrate, arguing that the sureties were unsubstantial and that there was a likelihood she could commit a similar offence, interfere with investigations, or abscond.
Defence attorney Hadad Salim opposed the objections, maintaining that all the necessary documentation had been presented and that the sureties were responsible and traceable members of society.
“For a surety to be substantial, the individual must be a responsible member of society with a known place of residence,” Salim argued, adding that the proposed sureties were well known within the community.
In his ruling, the presiding magistrate cited Article 23(6)(a) of the Constitution, noting that while every accused person has a right to apply for bail, its grant remains discretionary. He emphasised that such discretion must be exercised judiciously and without bias.
He further observed that granting bail does not amount to an acquittal but constitutes a temporary release to enable the accused to attend court proceedings while residing at home. The magistrate noted that the charge of incitement to violence is triable by his court, which therefore has jurisdiction to hear the application.
Addressing the prosecution’s objections, the magistrate ruled that being a friend or colleague of an accused person is not a legal bar to standing surety. He described the argument that friends might share the accused’s ideology as “presumptuous” and unsupported by evidence, adding that such reasoning undermines the presumption of innocence.
He also held that being related to the accused, whether as a niece or cousin, does not disqualify an individual from serving as a surety. On the absence of recommendation letters from religious superiors, the magistrate stated that such letters are not a legal requirement, though they may be considered an added advantage.
On concerns that religious sureties could be transferred and become difficult to trace, the magistrate dismissed the argument as speculative, noting that clergy are typically reassigned to known locations. After reviewing the credentials and identification documents of all four sureties, the court found them substantial.
The magistrate also took into account Dr Zedriga’s age and the absence of sufficient grounds to deny bail and accordingly granted the application.
David Lewis Rubongoya, the NUP Secretary General, welcomed the ruling but criticised the circumstances surrounding Dr Zedriga’s arrest and detention.
“Dr Lina Zedriga has been granted bail by this court. Unfortunately, she has had to spend this time under what we consider illegal detention,” Rubongoya said. He alleged that the targeting of NUP leaders was intended to undermine the party’s election management efforts across the country.
Dr Zedriga is facing charges of inciting violence allegedly committed in December 2025 in Omoro, Nwoya, Amuru and Gulu City in Northern Uganda. She is expected to reappear in court on March 24.
-URN. Give us feedback on this story through our email: kamwokyatimes@gmail.com
