The treaty says free movement. The border says otherwise.
For the second time in thirteen months, Senior Counsel Martha Karua has been turned back at the border of an East African Community partner state while travelling to a politically sensitive treason trial. In May 2025, Tanzania denied her entry at Dar es Salaam and deported her as she arrived to observe the trial of opposition leader Tundu Lissu. On June 22, 2026, Uganda did the same at Entebbe, holding her and then deporting her as she travelled to support the defence in the case involving Dr Kizza Besigye, where she serves as co-lead counsel.
In the Ugandan instance she held a valid Special Practising Certificate issued by the Uganda Law Council, and the colleagues she travelled with, including Law Society of Kenya President Charles Kanjama, were cleared through immigration. She alone was singled out, and no reason was given.
Both incidents sit against the East African Community's founding promises. Article 104 of the Treaty for the Establishment of the EAC commits partner states to adopt measures to achieve the free movement of persons, and the Treaty binds members more broadly to the rule of law.
The two denials differed in their stated basis but not in their result. Tanzania said Karua lacked accreditation to practise law there. In Uganda she held a valid Special Practising Certificate issued by the Uganda Law Council, and was turned away regardless, with no reason given. Accredited or not, the outcome was the same: counsel did not reach the courtroom.
Each denial came as a politically sensitive treason trial was about to proceed, and each removed an advocate who had travelled to observe or defend. Whatever the stated basis in any single case, the pattern is what carries weight: a guarantee of free movement, and with it the right of an accused to counsel of their choosing, that holds until a case becomes politically inconvenient, and then does not.
That is the gap between the treaty's text and its practice, and it is widening in public view.
If a member state can suspend a treaty promise of free movement, with a stated reason or with none, precisely when a trial is most politically sensitive, what is the promise worth to the citizens it was written for?
Uganda Law Society; Law Society of Kenya; East Africa Law Society; Daily Monitor; Nation; The EastAfrican; Al Jazeera; CNN; JURIST (May 2025 and June 2026). The Besigye and Lukwago matters are described by their defence teams; Ugandan authorities had not issued an official explanation for the denial at the time of writing. Treaty reference: Article 104, Treaty for the Establishment of the East African Community.