Nyarugenge Intermediate Court has upheld the decision to remand Victoire Ingabire Umuhoza, dismissing her appeal challenging a lower court’s ruling. Ingabire is facing charges of forming or joining a criminal organisation, conspiracy to commit crimes against the government, inciting public unrest, preparing unlawful demonstrations, and disseminating false information aimed at discrediting the government. ALSO READ: Ingabire appeals court decision remanding her Delivering the verdict on Wednesday, August 7, the court stated that the decision to deny bail was based on reasonable grounds to suspect that Ingabire committed the alleged crimes. The judges noted that the lower court correctly evaluated the criteria for pre-trial detention and found no flaws in its ruling. The court emphasized that pre-trial detention is lawful when the offences carry a potential sentence exceeding two years, as is the case here. Ingabire had lodged the appeal seeking bail while awaiting trial. Previously convicted of forming armed groups to destabilize the country and minimizing the 1994 Genocide against the Tutsi, Ingabire’s renewed legal troubles stem from an ongoing investigation linked to members of her unregistered political party, DALFA-Umurinzi. ALSO READ: Victoire Ingabire arrested over alleged plot to incite public disorder What did Ingabire argue in her appeal? Ingabire and her lawyer, Gatera Gashabana, contested the use of Article 106 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, arguing it contradicts constitutional provisions. They requested that the trial be suspended pending a ruling from the Supreme Court on the article’s constitutionality. Gashabana also questioned the legality of reopening a case that had allegedly remained dormant for over four years. Ingabire said she was previously questioned in 2021 regarding the same issues but was neither charged nor arrested at the time. In its ruling, the court rejected this line of argument, stating that the law allows lower courts to proceed with related trials unless the outcome of a constitutional review would directly affect the ongoing proceedings. In Ingabire’s case, the court ruled that the current pre-trial detention could proceed independent of the Supreme Court's review of the Article 106. The court also dismissed other grounds raised in the appeal, maintaining that the lower court’s decision was sound and procedurally correct. Prosecution’s position During the appeal hearing, prosecutors presented background information on the case, stating that Ingabire facilitated English-language training sessions through an encrypted platform known as Jitsi Meet. The sessions reportedly used materials authored by Serbian political activist Srdja Popovic, who is known for promoting non-violent resistance. Participants in these sessions allegedly used aliases such as “Turkey” and “Blessing” and were trained in subversive tactics intended to incite unrest. Prosecutors linked Ingabire to these activities through financial transactions and WhatsApp communications. They maintained that she poses a flight risk and could interfere with ongoing investigations if released.
