I acknowledge receipt of the instrument of appointment dated May 19, 2025, wherein you appointed me as a member of the Law Reform Committee.
I refuse the appointment for the following reasons. The judiciary’s transformative power of interpretation and application of the Constitution, should foster an environment where all criticism of the courts and judicial officers, like other public bodies and public officials, is freely expressed and dispassionately considered.
As eloquently underscored by the Constitutional court in Andrew Mwenda & EAMI v Attorney General, Consolidated Constitutional Petitions No 12 of 2005 and No 3 of 2006, requiring judicial officers to be thick-skinned recognises the potential of criticism and insults to promote accountability, enhance public trust, and ensure that justice is served without fear or favour.
Guided by this principle, you will recall that instead of honouring the Uganda Law Society (ULS) letter of January 16, 2025, in which the Radical New Bar (RNB) governing council of ULS sought a consultative meeting to address hot-button issues in an attempt to salvage the professional working relationship between the legal profession and the judiciary, you chose the path of tyranny and oppression.
Your actions at the opening of the New Law Year on February 7, 2025, including removing me from the programme, demanding an apology, and declaring the bar unwelcome to “your home”, have sown seeds of discord. Had you accepted our request, Mr Chief Justice, our nation’s justice sector would probably be back on track by now, rather than veering off course into further turmoil.
Case in point, with legitimate concerns emanating from chronic inadequate quantitative deployment of judges and registrars, the Masaka ULS chapter is on strike. Advocates serving a population of more than 2,000,000 have laid down their tools.
Rightly so, for with a backlog of 4,290 cases pending before a single judge and registrar, the Bar cannot efficiently represent clients who seek justice from court. Worryingly, Masaka is not an outlier. Unmanned judiciary hardware has become the norm countrywide, leading to unacceptable delays and miscarriages of justice.
Your legacy is justice denied through delay. Chronic inadequate qualitative deployment of judicial officers is, on the other hand, severely hindering our ability to perform our duties effectively.
This issue lies at the heart of our executive order RNB No 3 of 2024, which called for a boycott of judge Musa Ssekaana. Our aim was to trigger a comprehensive scrutiny of his handling of cases and an investigation into the mounting complaints of judicial misconduct against him. The recent Court of Appeal ruling in Kiwanuka v Kiwanuka, Civil Appeal 61 of 2020, is illuminating.
The appellate court’s unanimous finding that Ssekaana breached procedural fairness and the constitutional duty of transparency vindicates our position. Will you also publicly ask him to apologize? I am compelled to reject this appointment, though seemingly beneficial, due to your provocation of Ssekaana’s egregious judicial misconduct, which now hinders my participation in the LRC.
Specifically, his unlawful contempt of court committal order against me on February 14, 2025, allegedly for insulting him on X (formerly Twitter). A manifestly void order that has been pending expungement for far too long, forcing me indefinitely into exile, and raising serious concerns about the Ugandan judiciary’s credibility, fairness and efficiency under your watch, Mr Chief Justice.
Guided by the UN basic principles on the independence of the judiciary and the Commonwealth (Latimer House) principles, I strongly recommend that the LRC’s very first task be to review and reform the law of contempt of court, particularly as it relates to insults made while out of court, also known as “Scandalizing the Judiciary.”
This colonial-era law has become a blunt instrument of judicial tyranny that unjustly restricts freedom of expression, a fundamental right in a free and democratic society.
In a nascent 21st century constitutional democracy like ours, where corruption and bribery are rampant, even the most scathing and unsavoury public criticism of judicial performance—often misconstrued as insults—must be jealously safeguarded to ensure accountability.
Citizen insults of judicial officers should warrant no more than “a wry smile” as aptly put, 25 years ago, by the eminent British jurist, Lord Justice Simon Brown. Unfortunately, under your leadership, the Ugandan judiciary is crippled by the albatross of corruption and an epidemic of fragile egos, hence its debilitating hypersensitivity to criticism and insults.
According to the Inspectorate of Government’s 2021 “Cost of Corruption” report, Ugandan court users paid a staggering Shs 763 billion in bribes—43% of the 2019 justice sector budget—in a bid to cope with systemic issues like lengthy procedures and lack of transparency.
Instead of demanding apologies, Mr Chief Justice, focus on ensuring fair, transparent and speedy hearings, particularly for cases involving criticism of the judiciary. This would help the judiciary shed the albatross, uphold the rule of law, protect citizens’ rights, and pave the way for meaningful law reform that promotes transparency and accountability.
WAY FORWARD
Building on my earlier decision, in a communication to the chief registrar on December 16, 2024, to designate our most perpendicular ULS vice president, Anthony Asiimwe, to represent ULS in the Judiciary Council and all its committees, I strongly recommend his appointment to the LRC in my stead.
I have full confidence in his abilities to contribute to the noble endeavour of law reform in Uganda. And so, I unapologetically decline the appointment.
The author is president, Uganda Law Society.
In a nascent 21st century constitutional democracy like ours, where corruption and bribery are rampant, even the most scathing and unsavoury public criticism of judicial performance—often misconstrued as insults—must be jealously safeguarded to ensure accountability.
Citizen insults of judicial officers should warrant no more than “a wry smile” as aptly put, 25 years ago, by the eminent British jurist, Lord Justice Simon Brown. Unfortunately, under your leadership, the Ugandan judiciary is crippled by the albatross of corruption and an epidemic of fragile egos, hence its debilitating hypersensitivity to criticism and insults.
It should be ” The author is president, Uganda Law Society on the run”
Instead of “The author is president, Uganda Law Society.”
Why sugar coat things ?
me, this sugar coating, indeed. In fact Ssemakadde is contradicting himself. On one hand he unapologetically declined the appointment, but on the other hand he strongly recommend “our most perpendicular ULS vice president, Anthony Asiimwe, to represent ULS in the Judiciary Council and all its committees.”
If the system is broken and Ssemakadde doesn’t want to get involved, why would he recommend their “most perpendicular ULS vice president to be appointed?
Adv. Ssemakadde, it’s an insult to Ugandans to call the chief of hardcore organized criminals, Owiny Dollo, Chief justice or Mr. Chief justice. In your declining gesture above, you clearly demonstrated that Dollo is not even fit to be a judge. M7 has appointed judges who’re hardcore criminal like him [M7] as you have alluded to above. So, it’s further an insult for you to recommend a person whom you called, “our most perpendicular ULS vice president, Anthony Asiimwe,” to “his appointment to the LRC in my stead.” If you declined the appointment, why then recommend your most perpendicular ULS vice president? Is that fair?
Adv. Ssemakadde, in a nation where there’s neither democracy nor rule of law but rule of “tyranny” as you called it above, the appointment of your most perpendicular ULS vice president can’t and never will make any difference whatsoever.
What Uganda needs is a change of govt not to make [any] meaningless piecemeal “Law Reform.”
The fish rots from the head. M7 as the head of state is rotten to the core. So, he has absolute power and/or owns Uganda outright, and the judiciary [just like parliament] is an extension of the executive. So, Dollo is as rotten to the core and the chief of hardcore organized criminals. Period.
Uganda’s judiciary is as dirty an institution as it can get. But Sekaana is beneath comment. A one month roach has more honor under its belt than Sekaana can muster in 30 lifetimes. Repairing the image of the judiciary must start with his immediate firing.
Is Mr.Ssemakadde contradicting himself ?
I don`t think so.
Mr. Ssemakadde refused / declined the appointment and gave his personal reasons why.
But , as president of Uganda Law Society , he is legally obligated to exercise his statutory duty to have a representation , which he has done by recommending someone who will represent and protect the interests of the association he heads.
Even under a circumstance of tyranny , one has to device their own ventilation at least as a means of signalling dissent.
PS: I agree that Owiny Dollo is the worst Chief Whatever that cursed Uganda has ever had .
Jes, Ssemakadde’s reasons for declining the appointment are clear like day and night. In fact he calls Dollo, the chief of hardcore organized criminals, a tyrant. Ssemakadde is in exile because Dollo, the tyrant, who appointed him, and I totally agree with Ssemakadde to decline the appointment. So, which statutory obligated duty is he exercising to appoint his deputy to a committee appointed by a tyrant, Dollo? If Ssemakadde can’t protect his own interests and he is in exile because of a tyrant, Dollo, who demanded an apology from Ssemakadde, and he refused to tender an apology, which is why he is on the run, what interests of the association his deputy would protect from a tyrant who led SSemakadde into exile?
My understanding is that Mr.Ssemakadde has no issues with the Law Reform Committee ( LFC) itself, but he is totally opposed to how its is run and mismanaged by tyrannical CJ Owiny Dollo . I read Mr. Ssemakadde to be unimpressed by what he thinks is judicial incompetence by both CJ Dollo and Justice Ssekaana ( as opposed to the LRC)
His words ” Ssekaana`s egregious judicial miscnduct now hinder my participating in the LRC”.
Ib that case , I could be excused for saying that Mr.Ssemakadde is correct to select some one else to step in a make sure the ULS has a voice therein.
I note more of his words : ” I have full confidence in his abilities to contribute to the noble endeavour of LAW REFORM in Uganda”.
I suppose what Mr.Ssemakadde is saying is that the struggle to reform law ( among other things) should continue even if he is personally away in exile.
Am I wrong….?
Jes, you’re wrong. Our, Ugandans, problem does not lie in any reform of any kind where there’s neither democracy nor rule of law. So, Ssemakadde can’t eat his cake and have it. He correctly and rightly calls Dollo a tyrant, and further declined Dollo’s appointment of him to the bogus reforms committee, why recommend his deputy to the appointment made by a tyrant? Is it simply because the struggle to reform law (among other things) should continue even if he is personally away in exile?
Jes, I certainly believe that you clearly know that there’s no reform that’ll ever make sense as long as M7 is still in power. So, it’s clear as well that you clearly know that you’re wrong to say that Ssemakadde is not contradicting himself.
Remase Bwana . your and my understanding of how legal principals of law( in real scenarios) are applied are miles apart.
Personally , I do not see Mr. Ssemakadde contradicting himself in this particular case.
Saying so would mean ( as an example) that Dr. Besigye condradicted himself when he totally rejected the military court to try him , but still hired advocates to defend him in the same court.
Like Dr.Besigye , Mr. Ssemakadde is within his legal rights to strongly rebuke the conduct of the individuals he names , and still select another person to represent the Association.
As for things that will never happen under Mr.Museveni no matter what any one thinks or says , we are all GUILTY of COLLECTIVE FAILURE . Mr. Museveni and his cheer-leaders have failed to see the mess their longevity has created; the rest of us have failed to find a solution for a problem called Musevenism.
What do we do then , keep silent , do nothing , go after those who are trying , ???
Dr. Sserunkuma should have stopped writing years ago Why ? because whatever he has said of the years has changed nothing.
My guess is that he and others keep on and on going about it ,so that when things change , as they surely will , he will never say : I did nothing when the boat was sinking.