For years, East African leaders have spoken about regional integration, free movement, cooperation and building a community where borders matter a little less and shared values matter a little more.
It sounds impressive at conferences, looks great in official communiqués and always earns applause when cameras are rolling.
That is why many people were surprised when Kenyan lawyer, former justice minister and presidential aspirant Martha Karua reportedly landed in Uganda only to be denied entry and detained at the airport while attempting to observe legal proceedings involving opposition figures.
Suddenly, the conversation moved from grand speeches about unity to a much simpler question. If a prominent lawyer from a neighbouring East African country cannot freely enter to observe matters relating to justice, then what exactly happens to all those beautiful promises once they reach the immigration desk?
The Law Society of Kenya did not hide its concerns, arguing that the issue is bigger than one individual and bigger than one courtroom.
Their argument is that the real test of any regional bloc is not what is written in treaties but what happens when those principles become inconvenient.
Uganda of course has the sovereign right to control who enters its territory, but critics insist that sovereignty and regional commitments are supposed to walk side by side, not pull in opposite directions.
So now East Africa finds itself in an awkward moment where lawyers are defending the idea of regional cooperation while politicians explain why a respected legal figure could not cross a border.
It is a remarkable situation because nothing tests confidence in free movement quite like discovering that free movement may require permission at every step.
