Uganda General Court Martial: Hamza Lyavala Torture Implicates Maj Gen Birungi

• Hamza Lyavala testified at the Uganda General Court Martial that he was tortured and forced to implicate former CMI boss Maj Gen James Birungi in murder.
• Lyavala accused Brig Abdul Rugumayo, who was sacked as former CMI deputy chief in March 2026, of tearing up his initial statement and coercing him to record a new one on June 29, 2026, with specific false allegations against Birungi.
• The defense questioned Lyavala's credibility, citing age inconsistencies and his admission to receiving 250 million shillings from President Museveni.
• Lyavala claimed he was working as a government informer for Defence Intelligence and Security while associated with the ADF.
• The General Court Martial adjourned the case to October 26 for further hearing, following these serious allegations of a coerced witness statement.

Lawyers defending clients before the General Court Martial should be acutely aware of this precedent, as it highlights the necessity of scrutinizing the origins and veracity of all witness statements, especially when torture allegations surface.

Hamza Lyavala, a former member of the Allied Democratic Forces (ADF), recently delivered startling testimony before the Uganda General Court Martial in Makindye. During cross-examination by his lawyer, Frank Kanduho, Lyavala asserted that he was subjected to torture and compelled to fabricate evidence designed to implicate Maj Gen James Birungi, the former chief of Chieftaincy of Military Intelligence (CMI), in various serious offenses, including murder. This dramatic revelation came after Lyavala himself had been convicted last week following his own guilty plea.

His appearance before the military court on Monday, where he was being cross-examined, brought to light a significant allegation against Brig Abdul Rugumayo, who was sacked as the deputy head of CMI in March 2026. Lyavala explicitly stated that it was Brig Rugumayo who allegedly inflicted the torture and coerced him into altering his initial statement to specifically target Maj Gen Birungi. This testimony introduces a critical dimension to the ongoing proceedings, raising serious questions about the integrity of witness statements presented in such high-profile cases.

Lyavala detailed the coercive environment in which his statements were taken, recounting that he recorded a 69-page document over three days. This process occurred in the presence of Brig Rugumayo, alongside Maj Habyarimana, Maj Ssekajja, and Maj Okumu. According to Lyavala, Brig Rugumayo was the primary interrogator during this period and exhibited extreme harshness. He further testified that an initial statement, recorded on June 22, 2026, was summarily rejected and torn apart by Rugumayo, who deemed it unsatisfactory because it failed to sufficiently implicate Maj Gen Birungi.

The witness claimed that Rugumayo specifically instructed him on what to include in the revised statement. Lyavala confirmed that he was given specific phrases and narratives to incorporate, all aimed at pinning Maj Gen Birungi. These included assertions that Birungi was involved in a murder case, that Lyavala had met Birungi after he had transferred his office to Gen Otto, and that Birungi had dispatched them on an operation to kill individuals. Lyavala maintained that he was tortured by Brig Rugumayo, who then demanded a new statement be recorded on June 29, 2026, just a week after the first one was destroyed. This coerced witness statement Uganda now faces scrutiny.

The defense lawyer challenged Lyavala's overall credibility, pointing out inconsistencies in his testimony. For instance, Lyavala had at one point claimed to be 31 years old in his statement, yet he also indicated a birth year of 1993, which would make him 33 in 2026. Lyavala dismissed this discrepancy as a simple mistake. Furthermore, the defense suggested that Lyavala might be motivated by financial gain, an assertion that gained traction when Lyavala admitted to receiving substantial sums of money. He confirmed that he received 150 million shillings for a house and an additional 100 million shillings for rehabilitation, both disbursed under the direct orders of President Museveni, following his renunciation of terrorism.

Lyavala, however, offered a counter-narrative to these financial incentives, clarifying that his continued association with the ADF was not as an active terrorist but as an informer for the government, specifically working with the Defence Intelligence and Security. He also addressed his involvement in the "fake bombs plot" at Munyonyo Martyrs Basilica, stating he was unaware that innocent lives, such as Summaya Byaruhanga's, would be lost. He believed that trained soldiers from the Joint Anti-Terrorism Task Force (JATT) were present to arrest individuals and detonate the device safely. Lyavala ultimately placed the blame for the tragic outcome on his handler, Lt Col Ephraim Byaruhanga, asserting his own role was merely that of an informant. This ADF member witness testimony, therefore, presents a complex picture of motivations and allegiances.

The testimony of Hamza Lyavala, alleging torture and forced implication of Maj Gen Birungi, carries significant weight for the ongoing proceedings at the Uganda General Court Martial. Such claims of a coerced witness statement Uganda directly challenge the fundamental principles of due process and the admissibility of evidence, particularly in a military court setting where the stakes are exceptionally high. The allegations against Brig Abdul Rugumayo, a senior military official, underscore the potential for abuse of power within intelligence operations and raise serious questions about the methods employed in securing confessions or testimonies.

Lawyers defending clients before the General Court Martial should be acutely aware of this precedent, as it highlights the necessity of scrutinizing the origins and veracity of all witness statements, especially when torture allegations surface. The chairman of the General Court Martial, Brig Richard Tukacungurwa, acknowledged the gravity of the situation by adjourning the case. Further hearings are scheduled for October 26, during which the court will likely delve deeper into these serious accusations, potentially impacting the credibility of key evidence and the fairness of the trial.

Lawyers defending clients in Uganda's General Court Martial should be alert to potential due process violations and challenges to the admissibility of witness statements, particularly if there are allegations of torture or coercion, as this testimony provides a precedent for such claims.

Source: Original reporting via Nile Post