The ongoing preparations for the high-profile Ggaba toddlers’ murder case have ignited sharp criticism from lawyer Godwin Toko, who has described the proceedings as a “public circus” and accused the Judiciary of attempting to repair its public image through heightened visibility of the trial.
The case, involving suspect Christopher Onyum Okello, is set to be heard through a Mobile High Court session at the Ggaba Community Church Grounds in Kampala, marking the first such criminal sitting in the city under the Judiciary’s new Mobile Courts Practice Directions.
Principal Judge Lady Justice Jane Frances Abodo recently inspected the venue, while Lady Justice Alice Komuhangi Khaukha is expected to preside over the proceedings.
However, Toko has questioned the optics surrounding the case, arguing that the extensive public communication and repeated online updates from the Judiciary contrast with its handling of other politically sensitive cases.
He alleged that the process risks creating a hostile public atmosphere against the accused, describing it as a “lynch mob situation” enabled by excessive publicity.
According to him, the Judiciary appears to be using the case to project an image of public engagement, despite what he termed broader concerns about institutional consistency.
Toko further pointed to what he described as selective visibility on the Judiciary’s communication platforms, contrasting the Ggaba case with prolonged detention and court proceedings involving other prominent figures such as opposition politician Dr. Kizza Besigye, who he said has not received similar public updates.
He argued that the disparity raises questions about institutional neutrality and public communication priorities in high-profile cases.
In his remarks, Toko also drew historical parallels, referencing past political and legal figures who were once involved in shaping laws before later facing prosecution under similar legal frameworks.
He cited examples from Uganda’s political history, suggesting a recurring pattern where legal architects later become subjects of the same systems they helped establish.
The lawyer further warned of what he termed “historical irony,” suggesting that those currently overseeing justice systems could one day face similar public trials under different political circumstances.
He said such scenarios, while hypothetical, reflect the unpredictability of political and legal environments in Africa.
The Judiciary has maintained that the Mobile Courts initiative is aimed at enhancing access to justice, improving efficiency, and ensuring that proceedings are conducted closer to affected communities.
Officials have also emphasized that the Ggaba session is being held under established legal guidelines and strict procedural safeguards.
As the trial approaches, the case continues to attract significant public attention, with debates emerging over transparency, judicial communication, and the balance between public interest and fair trial rights.
The proceedings are expected to proceed under heightened security as Kampala hosts its first Mobile High Court criminal sitting, a development already shaping wider discussions on justice delivery and institutional trust.