The Eron Kiiza passport appeal has intensified Uganda’s legal and political tensions. Eron Kiiza, a respected human rights lawyer, claims the High Court has ignored multiple requests to release his passport. He urgently needs the document to travel abroad for medical care.
Previously, in January, Kiiza faced a military court where he was convicted of contempt. Allegedly, he had assaulted a court orderly while representing opposition leader Dr. Kizza Besigye. The court sentenced him to nine months in prison. However, the High Court later ruled that the sentence exceeded the legal maximum, which is only three months.
On April 4, 2025, the court granted Kiiza bail. As part of the conditions, he had to surrender his passport and report to the registrar every month. Although he complied, he has yet to get his passport back. Notably, he sent two written requests to the court registry—both of which went unanswered.
“In compliance with bail condition No.4 of the bail ruling vide miscellaneous application No. 118 of 2025 Kiiza Eron Vs Uganda delivered on April 4, 2025, I request for my passport to facilitate my travel abroad during May and June, 2025,” he stated. He emphasized that the travel is necessary for health, rest, and recovery. Moreover, he reaffirmed his full commitment to the bail terms.
Consequently, the Eron Kiiza passport appeal has gained public attention. Kiiza shared his frustration on social media. “I’m failing to sleep because the High Court of Uganda (Criminal Division) is holding onto my passport,” he wrote. “My health cannot wait, but the politics behind the delay to give me my passport can wait.” As a result, he threatened to lead a peaceful protest with 100 supporters if no action is taken.
Many observers now believe the delay may have political motivations. Kiiza has represented several high-profile opposition leaders. Therefore, critics argue that the passport delay may be a form of retaliation for his legal activism.
Furthermore, legal experts say the court’s actions could violate Uganda’s Constitution. Article 23(6) protects individuals on bail, ensuring fair treatment and freedom to seek necessary care. Accordingly, refusing access to travel for medical reasons without justification may breach these rights.
In response to media inquiries, Judiciary spokesperson James Ereemye Mawanda encouraged direct engagement. “Let Counsel Eron visit the chambers of the deputy registrar so that he can address the issue,” he advised. He further noted that some individuals fail to follow up after submitting letters.
Nevertheless, Kiiza’s supporters argue that formal requests should be enough. They believe the silence from the registrar reflects deeper inefficiencies—or even political interference—in the judicial system.
In a broader sense, the Eron Kiiza passport appeal raises questions about judicial independence and constitutional rights in Uganda. Whether or not the court returns his passport will set an important precedent. It will either reaffirm or erode public trust in Uganda’s legal process.
Ultimately, this case is more than a legal dispute. It has become a symbol of the ongoing fight for justice, fair treatment, and access to medical care without undue obstruction. The outcome of the Eron Kiiza passport appeal will echo far beyond one courtroom—both nationally and internationally.
