Suspended first Vice President Dr Riek Machar stands behind bars at Freedom Hall during his trial and seven other leaders of the SPLM-IO - Photo credit: Eye Radio/Awan Moses

The prosecution in the ongoing Nasir trial has rejected an application by defence lawyers representing suspended First Vice President Dr. Riek Machar and seven co-accused, saying it challenges the authority and independence of the Special Court.

The court held its 111th session on Monday and heard the prosecution’s response to the defence application before adjourning the proceedings until August 26, 2026.

The defence had asked the court to clarify and protect the accused persons’ constitutional right to legal representation of their choice.

The application followed advice from the court that Dr. Machar could consider changing his legal team if he had lost confidence in his lawyers.

During the 110th session on Friday, the defence told the court that none of the eight accused had requested a change of lawyers due to a loss of confidence.

The defence said the accused had chosen their current lawyers, who have represented them since September 2025, and that none had formally asked the court to replace them.

However, Prosecutor Advocate Ajo Onyi Ohisa rejected the application, saying it was submitted under protest and amounted to a challenge to the authority of the court and the judicial process.

Ohisa described the defence filing as a coordinated protest that could delay the proceedings and prolong the delivery of justice.

He urged the court not to allow the application to consume more court time or divert attention from the ongoing trial and asked the judges to dismiss it.

The prosecution also filed a counter-application seeking guidance on how the accused should be examined based on the prosecution’s evidence before they are allowed to present their defence statements.

According to Ohisa, the examination of the accused should take place before any defence statements are read.

Lead Defence Advocate Dr. Geri Raymond Legge confirmed receiving the prosecution’s response and counter-application and asked for more time to prepare a written reply.

The Special Court granted the request and adjourned proceedings until August 26, when the defence team is expected to respond to the prosecution’s filings.