By Alituha Aaron
The Executive Director of the Centre for Constitutional Governance (CCG), Dr.Sarah Bireete, has been released on a cash bail of UGX 1 million following nearly a month in detention over allegations linked to the unlawful acquisition and disclosure of voters’ data belonging to the Electoral Commission.
Bireete was granted bail on Wednesday on strict conditions, including a prohibition on leaving the country without prior court authorisation and a requirement to surrender her passport to court. In addition to the cash bail, the court bonded her sureties at UGX 10 million non-cash each.
The court further ordered that the case resumes on February 27, when hearing of the substantive matter is expected to continue.
Her release comes amid sustained pressure from civil society actors and human rights defenders, many of whom have criticised her prolonged detention as punitive and disproportionate to the offences alleged.
Background to the Case
Sarah Bireete was arrested and arraigned before court on charges of unlawfully obtaining and disclosing voters’ data, contrary to provisions of Uganda’s electoral and data protection laws. Prosecutors allege that she accessed and disseminated voters’ information belonging to the Electoral Commission without lawful authority.
The state contends that the alleged actions undermined the integrity of electoral data and violated statutory safeguards governing the handling of sensitive voter information. However, Bireete and her legal team have consistently denied the accusations, maintaining that her actions were undertaken in the public interest and within the scope of civic and constitutional advocacy.
Her arrest sparked widespread debate within legal and governance circles, with critics arguing that the charges form part of a broader pattern of criminalising civil society oversight and dissent, particularly around electoral accountability and governance reforms.
Civil society organisations have further questioned the justification for her extended pre-trial detention, citing the non-capital nature of the offence and her known fixed abode, arguing that bail should have been granted earlier.
As the case heads back to court later this month, it is expected to test the boundaries between state control of electoral data and the role of governance watchdogs in scrutinising electoral processes.
