Buganda Road Chief Magistrate’s Court has granted lawyer Male Mabirizi mandatory bail after ruling that he had spent more than the constitutionally prescribed 60 days on remand without his trial commencing.
Chief Magistrate Ritah Neumbe Kidasa, in a ruling delivered on Friday, ordered Mabirizi’s release on a cash bail of Shs2 million.
He is also required to present two substantial sureties, each holding a valid National Identification Card. The sureties will execute a non-cash bond of Shs5 million each.
The court further directed Mabirizi, through his sureties, to provide details of his permanent residence for verification by a court-appointed officer.
He was also ordered to surrender his passport to court and barred from leaving Uganda without written permission until the case is concluded.
However, Mabirizi told the court that he does not have a passport. He indicated that he would challenge the requirement or seek confirmation from the Ministry of Internal Affairs that no passport has been issued to him. This could delay his physical release despite the bail order.
The court also warned Mabirizi against directly or indirectly interfering with prosecution witnesses and directed him to personally attend all court sessions relating to his case.
The magistrate cautioned that failure to comply with any of the bail conditions could lead to cancellation of his bail.
Constitutional Right To Bail
The court relied on Article 23(6) of the Constitution and Section 76 of the Magistrates Courts Act, which provide for mandatory release on bail when an accused person has spent more than 60 days on remand before trial, subject to exceptions provided for by law.
The court established that Mabirizi had been in custody continuously since February 3, 2026, initially in connection with another criminal case, and that the period he had spent on remand had substantially exceeded the constitutional threshold.
Kidasa ruled that once the constitutional and statutory conditions for mandatory bail had been satisfied, the court had no discretion to continue withholding bail.
The magistrate, however, rejected Mabirizi’s request to have the current case dismissed for want of prosecution.
She noted that criminal prosecutions are conducted by the Director of Public Prosecutions and not by individual complainants. The absence of complainants from some mention hearings, therefore, did not by itself demonstrate that the prosecution had abandoned the case.
Charges Against Mabirizi
Mabirizi is facing three charges linked to TikTok publications allegedly targeting Chief Justice Flavian Zeija and Court of Appeal and Constitutional Court Justice Musa Ssekaana.
Prosecution alleges that in January 2026, Mabirizi used his TikTok account to publish an audio-visual report containing allegations that Zeija was corrupt, a fraudster and a conman, among other accusations.
He is also accused of publishing another video alleging that Justice Ssekaana was a conman and fraudster, claims the prosecution says were false.
A third allegation is that Mabirizi broadcast the content through TikTok without a broadcasting licence issued by the Uganda Communications Commission.
The current case comprises two counts of publishing fake news and one count of broadcasting without a licence.
Mabirizi initially faced charges under the Computer Misuse Act, including allegations relating to hate speech and malicious information.
That case was withdrawn on April 1, 2026, after the Constitutional Court declared the provisions of the Computer Misuse Act under which he had been charged invalid because of procedural defects in their enactment.
On the same day, the prosecution instituted the current case under the Uganda Communications Act and the Uganda Communications (Licensing) Regulations, 2019.
Court Rejects Legal Challenges
Mabirizi had challenged the new charges on several grounds, including the jurisdiction of the magistrates’ court, the application of the Communications Act to TikTok content, freedom of expression, the alleged vagueness of the charges and the validity of the 2019 licensing regulations.
The magistrate rejected the objections, ruling that none of them provided sufficient grounds to stop the case from proceeding to trial.
The court also dismissed his claim of double jeopardy.
Kidasa held that the earlier case had not ended with an acquittal or conviction following a trial. Instead, it had been withdrawn after the law under which Mabirizi had been charged was declared invalid.
The court also found no evidence that the Director of Public Prosecutions had acted in bad faith or was using successive prosecutions as a means of harassing Mabirizi.
Two applications seeking references to the Constitutional Court were also rejected. The magistrate ruled that the issues raised either involved constitutional principles that had already been settled or complaints concerning the conduct of the proceedings that did not require a fresh constitutional interpretation.
Proceedings Moved To Chambers
In a separate direction issued alongside the ruling, the Chief Magistrate ordered those future proceedings in the case be conducted in chambers.
The decision followed concerns over sustained commentary about the case on social media, including what the court described as personalised attacks against judicial officers, prosecutors and the complainants.
The magistrate said the volume and nature of the commentary had created circumstances that could affect the fairness and orderly conduct of the proceedings.
She clarified that the chambers arrangement is temporary and may be reviewed by the court or upon application by either party.
The order does not prevent access to official court records, rulings or judgments issued in the matter.
Having disposed of the preliminary objections and applications, the court directed that Criminal Case No. 184 of 2026 proceed to hearing without further delay.
Mabirizi’s Previous Court Battles
Mabirizi has previously had several confrontations with the judiciary over his social media activities.
In January 2022, Justice Musa Ssekaana, who was then heading the High Court Civil Division, ordered Mabirizi to pay Shs300 million for contempt of court following social media attacks against then High Court Judge Phillip Odoki.
The dispute followed the dismissal of Mabirizi’s application seeking to stop the Capital Markets Authority from extending the MTN initial public offering period and listing its shares on the Uganda Securities Exchange.
Despite a warning against attacking judicial officers, Mabirizi was accused of continuing to post derogatory material on social media platforms.
He was subsequently imprisoned for 18 months over continued attacks on judicial officers and completed the sentence in 2023.
The latest case now moves to trial, with Mabirizi having secured his release on mandatory bail but remaining subject to strict conditions imposed by the court.
English 