Kampala, Uganda – The relationship between the legal fraternity (the Bar) and the judiciary (the Bench) in Uganda is currently facing significant strain, with rising tensions threatening the integrity of justice delivery in the country. At the center of this conflict is Isaac Ssemakadde, President of the Uganda Law Society (ULS), who has emerged as a vocal critic of the judiciary, particularly targeting Chief Justice Alfonse Chigamoy Owiny-Dollo and Justice Musa Ssekaana.
Ssemakadde has accused the judiciary of misconduct, including abuse of power and bias, leading to a series of confrontational actions. These include expelling the Attorney General and Solicitor General from the ULS, calling for a boycott of Justice Ssekaana, and using derogatory language to criticize the Director of Public Prosecutions, Jane Abodo. This aggressive stance has drawn mixed reactions from legal experts, with some praising his courage while others warn that such confrontational tactics could further damage relations between the Bar and Bench.
Concerns Raised by Lawyers
Lawyers have expressed serious concerns about delays in judgment delivery, with reports indicating that the Supreme Court’s clearance rates were as low as 8% in 2023. Additionally, there are fears regarding executive influence over judicial decisions and a perceived lack of independence within the judiciary. These issues were formally presented to judicial leaders during a recent judges’ conference by Senior Counsel John Mary M Mugisha, highlighting the urgent need for reform.
The Judiciary’s Response
In response to these criticisms, Chief Justice Owiny-Dollo has defended judicial independence, emphasizing that it does not equate to separation from state responsibilities. He has called for improved communication and harmony between different branches of government to foster a more effective justice system.
Potential Consequences
The ongoing tensions have raised alarms about their potential impact on public trust in the justice system. Chief Justice Owiny-Dollo has warned that “friendly fire” between these institutions could be detrimental, as conflicts may undermine the rule of law essential for a functioning democracy.