The petition filed during the ULS election campaigns has raised questions about his motives. While he claims to be acting in good faith, observers have suggested that the petition is a gimmick to gain electoral advantage.
The performative petitioner has already taken to social media to leverage it for election advantage. All previous attorney generals have always had their own law firms. The concept of the AG being the head of the bar, a first among equals, is not just longstanding but also not unique to Uganda. It obtains in the United Kingdom, Kenya and Tanzania for example.
The AG has been in office since 2021. The question then is, why now?
This suspicion is further fuelled by Ssemakadde’s history of attacking the attorney general. In a previous article, he launched a scathing attack on him, going far beyond fair criticism or legitimate legal commentary. He not only targeted the attorney general personally but also insulted his family members.
Contrary to Ssemakadde’s prophecy of gloom and doom in that article, none of the things he fearmongered on in that article have happened. Instead, all objective observers will notice that there has been a measurable improvement in the efficiency and effectiveness of the AG’s chambers.
On July 18, 2024, the New Vision reported that in the previous year, the AG’s chambers represented government in 2,526 cases. They won 112 and lost 41. They saved government Shs 12.7 billion as compared to a loss of Shs 11 billion. They managed 192 matters via alternative dispute resolution mechanisms. Never before has the country ever received a report card of any sort on the performance of the AG’s chambers.
ATTACKS ON JUDGES
Ssemakadde’s attacks have not been limited to the AG. He singled out the director of public prosecutions (DPP) Lady Justice Jane Frances Abodo for the most shameful and vulgar insults on social media. He falsely stated that her appointment to that office was merely an act in affirmative action based on her gender and the region she hails from.
The fact is that the amiable DPP is easily the most qualified occupant of that office in the last 25 years. All previous occupants of that office did not have either the specialized academic qualifications or experience that she had garnered at the time of her appointment.
As a star prosecutor, she had risen to the position of Assistant DPP with specialty in prosecuting economic crime. Albeit briefly, she also served as a Justice in the Criminal division of the High court. Before that, Ssemakadde attacked the prolific and award-winning Civil division Justice Musa Ssekaana in similar personal and shameful insults.
Ssemakadde’s behaviour is plainly harmful to the individuals concerned. Additionally, it amounts to cyber bullying, cyber harassment, and cyber stalking, all of which are offences under the Computer Misuse Act, 2011. Under the laws governing advocates, his conduct is dishonourable and disgraceful, and it amounts to professional misconduct.
This behaviour also harms the legal profession as it enables a culture where accepting to serve in a public office means stripping a person of their full rights to the protection of the law. Serving in a public office should not make a person’s family a legitimate target for harassment and insults.
Such a hostile environment will deter qualified individuals from entering public service. It undermines the public’s confidence in the office of the AG and the judiciary.
APPROACH IS COUNTERPRODUCTIVE
Using insults and vulgarities rather than good legal arguments and persuasion is in fact counterproductive. For example, the record of Ssemakadde’s acolyte Male Mabirizi shows that he wrecks almost all the court cases he files. In the rule of the jungle of social media, where personal attacks and insults hold sway, they excel.
In the courts of law where the law and rules apply, they fail dismally. By contrast, more civilized public law, and human rights practitioners such as Dr Busingye Kabumba and Nicholas Opiyo obtain far better results both in court and out of it via their more civilized approach.
The principles of civility and decorum underpin the legal profession.
Lawyers should be able to engage in robust debate and criticism without resorting to personal insults or harassment. A confrontation between the persons and the office of the president of ULS and the AG portends badly for the nation and the legal profession. All must be done to prevent it.
There is every good reason to cultivate a good working relationship between the offices of the president ULS and the AG. Apart from being the head of the bar, the AG sits on many committees that directly impact the legal professional including, the Law Council. Unnecessary confrontations with the AG will prematurely close out avenues to collaborate, to pursue and to achieve mutual interests.
Recently, for example, the AG has been pivotal in the stakeholders’ engagement that has resulted in the upcoming admission of more than 1,500 students who had been left out in this year’s Law Development Centre admissions. He has also been pivotal in the ongoing engagement with ULS on the issue of availability and access to the 2024 revised edition of the laws of Uganda.
Such resolutions and progress on important legal issues will not be obtainable if the office of the president ULS makes it its mission to antagonize the person and the office of the AG for, sadly, cheap popularity.
The Uganda Law Society has a moral duty to stand up and protect the public officials concerned, the profession and the nation. To paraphrase Edmund Burke, “the only thing necessary for the triumph of evil, is for good men and women to do nothing.”
The writer is an advocate of High court.
inarticle} inarticle}