Ugandan journalist and political commentator Andrew Mwenda has claimed that audio and video recordings being relied upon in the treason case against opposition politician Dr Kizza Besigye were subjected to technical examinations and found to be authentic.
Mwenda reportedly made the claim as debate continues over recordings presented by the prosecution in the case, in which Besigye is jointly charged with his aide Obeid Lutale and UPDF Captain Denis Oola.
According to Mwenda, the recordings were taken to highly regarded American information-technology and forensic laboratories for examination to determine whether they had been edited, manipulated or fabricated.
He further claimed that officials linked to the United States, France and the British diplomatic mission were aware of or witnessed the authentication process.
Mwenda’s assertions have added another layer to an already contentious case, particularly because questions have been raised publicly over whether the recordings could have been digitally altered or manipulated.
However, the specific claim that American, French and British officials independently authenticated the recordings has not been independently confirmed by the diplomatic missions in publicly available information reviewed for this report.
What has been established is that the prosecution has presented a substantial collection of audio and video material before the Criminal Division of the High Court in Kampala.
The recordings were introduced through prosecution witness Andrew Wilson, a private security investigator who testified that he covertly recorded meetings involving Besigye and other individuals in locations including Geneva, Athens and Nairobi. Wilson displayed several covert recording devices to court, including cameras concealed in everyday objects and audio-recording equipment.
The prosecution alleges that the meetings captured in the recordings were connected to plans to overthrow the Ugandan government and assassinate President Yoweri Museveni. It also alleges that the accused persons discussed obtaining weapons, organising paramilitary training and acquiring other materials.
Besigye and his co-accused face treason-related allegations, which they have not been convicted of. The prosecution is required to prove its case in court, while the defence has the opportunity to challenge the evidence and its authenticity, relevance and interpretation.
Importantly, reports from the proceedings have also highlighted difficulties with some of the recordings played in court. The Independent reported that several of the videos and audios were difficult to hear because of poor sound quality, excessive noise and echo. Some people in court reportedly struggled to understand what was being discussed in the recordings.
Uganda Radio Network similarly reported that recordings lasting more than two hours were played, but the court did not complete listening to all of them during the August 24 proceedings.
The issue of authenticity is therefore distinct from the question of what the recordings actually prove. A recording can be genuine while the interpretation of its contents, the identity of individuals appearing in it and the context in which statements were made remain matters for the court to determine.
Mwenda, however, argues that the authentication issue should put to rest suggestions that the recordings are artificial or AI-generated.
In comments attributed to him, Mwenda also questioned why international organisations that frequently speak about human rights had not issued fresh statements defending Besigye after the recordings were presented.
His argument appears to be that the presentation of the evidence has significantly changed the circumstances surrounding the case and that organisations previously concerned about Besigye’s treatment should now address the substance of the allegations.
The development comes as the prosecution continues presenting evidence in the high-profile case, with audio and video recordings forming part of a wider body of evidence that also includes witness testimony, communications and other investigative material.
For now, Mwenda’s claim that the recordings were authenticated by foreign laboratories and diplomatic officials remains an allegation attributed to him rather than an independently verified finding by those institutions.
Ultimately, the High Court will determine what evidential weight should be attached to the recordings and whether the prosecution has established the charges against Besigye and his co-accused beyond the required legal threshold.
