Two former students of St Bernard’s Mannya Secondary School in Kyotera district have been ordered to defend themselves over the 2018 fire that destroyed the school’s boys’ dormitory and killed 10 students.Masaka High court senior resident judge Victoria Nakintu Katamba ruled that prosecution had presented sufficient evidence requiring Edison Nio, a former Senior Four student, and Alex Mugarura, a chapati vendor who operated near the school in Mannya trading centre, to answer the charges against them.The two are facing 56 counts of arson, murder, attempted murder, attempted arson and malicious damage to property.Prosecution, led by Senior State Attorney Deborah Itwau, alleges that Nio, Mugarura and others still at large conspired to set the boys’ dormitory on fire on November 11, 2018.The prosecution alleges that the fire killed 10 students, injured several others and destroyed school property.Justice Nakintu delivered the ruling after prosecution closed its case last week following testimony from 18 witnesses, including the school’s former head teacher, his deputy, police detectives, teachers and survivors of the fire.The judge said the court had examined the evidence presented by prosecution and found grounds requiring the two accused to enter their defence.According to the evidence considered by the court, Nio and other students were serving a one-month suspension when the fire occurred. Instead of returning to their respective homes, the students allegedly remained at a nearby trading centre, where they were accommodated by Mugarura.The judge also took note of testimony from Ronald Nsubuga, the school’s former head teacher, who said he had received intelligence that Nio and other suspended students were planning to retaliate against the school.Although Nio and Mugarura denied involvement in the fire, Justice Nakintu said the prosecution evidence raised questions that required the accused to provide explanations in their defence.She directed the two to prepare and present their defence at the earliest opportunity.Defence challenges prosecution caseDuring the prosecution case, defence lawyer Sam Ssekyewa asked the court to acquit his clients, arguing that none of the prosecution witnesses testified to having personally heard the alleged plans or seen Nio and Mugarura setting the dormitory on fire.Ssekyewa argued that the two had become victims of circumstance and that their presence at the trading centre while on suspension was not sufficient evidence to link them to the fire.He also accused police of failing to pursue other possible leads and instead focusing largely on the suspended students. According to Ssekyewa, evidence emerging during cross-examination pointed to administrative disagreements at the school involving the newly appointed head teacher and some members of staff.He said the new head teacher had introduced changes, including the demotion of some teachers, which could have generated resentment and contributed to the fire.The defence also intends to rely on a video recording allegedly made by the former Chieftaincy of Military Intelligence (CMI), in which a man purportedly confesses to being part of a group hired to burn the dormitory as part of a rivalry between two neighbouring schools.Ssekyewa said police ignored the alleged confession and other potential leads and concentrated on the students.He said some of the students who had initially been accused had since been acquitted for lack of evidence and that the defence was preparing evidence aimed at securing the acquittal of the remaining accused.Several accused already acquittedThe case has already resulted in the discharge or acquittal of some of the people who were initially accused.In 2024, the court acquitted Henry Talemwa after his lawyers raised concerns over alleged violations of his rights as a juvenile, including claims that police falsified his age and detained him with adult inmates.Dickson Kisuule was also acquitted in July 2026 after the court found that he was in police custody when the fire occurred, making it impossible for him to have physically participated in setting the dormitory ablaze.The latest ruling does not amount to a finding of guilt against Nio and Mugarura. They remain presumed innocent and will now have an opportunity to challenge the prosecution evidence and present their own defence.The post Students accused of burning Kyotera school have a case to answer, court rules appeared first on The Observer Media Ltd.