By Nathan Eyagu

SOROTI – A legal storm is brewing as city-based lawyer Patrick Joshua Okello has been dragged to court by civic rights activist Opio Emmanuel over his public defense and endorsement of top National Resistance Movement (NRM) figures, including Hon. Dr. Mike Mukula and Speaker of Parliament Anita Among.

The case, filed in the High Court of Uganda under Miscellaneous Cause No. 84 of 2025, is scheduled for hearing on April 25, 2025. The applicant, Opio Emmanuel, is seeking multiple declarations and legal remedies, accusing Okello of promoting leaders involved in alleged misuse of public funds and unethical conduct.

Opio contends that Joshua Okello, who identifies himself as a lawyer, lacks a verifiable official address and has positioned himself as a defender of politicians facing serious public scrutiny. Among those he has publicly supported are Hon. Mike Mukula, whom he endorsed for NRM Vice Chairman (Eastern Region), and Speaker Anita Among, who is reportedly under the spotlight for unexplained wealth and alleged abuse of parliamentary resources.

In his affidavit, Opio paints a picture of a politically engaged Ugandan citizen advocating for accountability and transparency. He argues that Okello’s actions mislead the public by backing individuals whose integrity has been questioned and calls for a full investigation into his qualifications and motives.

The application further seeks a court order barring Okello from advocating for politicians accused of corruption, arguing that such conduct contributes to public suffering. Opio is demanding UGX 500 million in compensation, citing damages caused by the continued support and shielding of leaders allegedly involved in embezzlement and abuse of office.

He also requests that Okello be committed to civil prison for contempt of the Uganda Law Society rules, citing a lack of professional conduct expected of legal practitioners in Uganda.

Opio describes the political landscape in Uganda as deeply divided, warning against the rise of inexperienced leaders being promoted through partisan alliances. He emphasizes the need for honest, unifying figures and lauds Mukula's experience but questions the manner and motivation behind the endorsements.

The case has attracted public attention due to its political undertones, with both Mukula and Speaker Among being influential figures in the ruling party. As the April court date approaches, the legal fraternity and political observers alike are watching closely to see how the matter unfolds.