Nyarugenge Intermediate Court will next week deliver its ruling on a bail appeal filed by four men suspected of plotting terror activities on Rwandan territory through an Islamic fundamentalist movement.

The quartet is part of a group of five that were last month remanded by Kicukiro Primary Court on charges of plotting against an established government, terrorism and conspiracy to commit terrorism.

The five suspects – Amran Rumanzi, Abdalla Kabendera, Yazid Nizeyimana, Ibrahim Rurangwa, and Justin Omar Uwimana are said to have conducted research, held meetings and discussions about the Hizb ut-Tahrir (translated as Party of Liberation), a movement of Muslim fundamentalists bent on "liberating” itself from governments and establishing an Islamic State governed in accordance with Islamic principles.

The Hizb ut-Tahrir describes itself as an international pan-Islamic political organisation with an aim of re-establishment of an Islamic caliphate to resume Islamic ways of life in the Muslim world.

All but Rurangwa appealed against their remand.

Appearing in court on Tuesday, the suspects told court that the terror crimes they are being prosecuted for are not connected with the activities they did.

One of thehir lawyers mainly argued that the Hizb ut-Tahrir is a non-violent movement which only teaches Islamic principles and it should not be described as a terror organisation.

Here, he referred to a study by David Anderson an expert in counter-terrorism and submitted to the United Nations. According to the suspects’ lawyer, Anderson’s research listed a number of terror organisations in the world but it did not include the Hizb ut-Tahrir among them.

"Now, what does the prosecution base on to link our clients to terrorism?” he asked.

The lawyers also argued that their clients should not be prosecuted for a research they did on internet since people are free to carry out their research without restraint.

According to prosecution, Amran Rumanzi carried out research on the Hizb ut-Tahrir movement, and later made a plan of implementing its principles by holding one-on-one sensitisations, communal gatherings with the aim of toppling the government as a result of the dialogues.

The prosecutor told court that the case is not only based on terrorism but also other charges including plotting against an established government or the President of the Republic, and conspiracy to plot against the government.

"This movement aims at establishing an Islamic state. Doesn’t that mean that requires them to first eliminate the current leadership?” the prosecutor wondered.

He also argued that the secrecy in which the meetings of the movement were being held also showed that it was something negative to the government.

"They used to order their audience to switch off their phones and remove the batteries during the meetings so that they avoid being tapped by the government satellites,” he said.

As the hearing was concluding, one of the defence lawyers asked court to look into the case thoroughly so that his clients are not be punished for serious crimes which they did not really commit,

"Crimes like plotting against the president and the country are very high crimes that can result into life imprisonment, yet my clients did not do serious anti-government activities deserving of such. They are not even soldiers,” he said.

The court is expected to pronounce its judgment on the matter on January 15.