Uganda’s justice system is burdened with inefficiencies, including case backlogs, delayed processes, and subjective decision-making, all of which undermine timely access to justice.
According to the Judiciary Annual Performance Report for Financial Year (FY) 2023/24, Ugandan courts had a pending caseload of 161,838 cases, with 42,588 cases classified as backlog, representing 26.32% of all pending cases.
Although this marks a slight improvement from previous years, with case backlog reducing by 0.87% (372 cases) from FY 2022/23, the persistence of these delays underscores the need for comprehensive reforms to enhance judicial efficiency and improve justice delivery.
One critical area requiring reform to improve overall efficiency is the role of court assessors in Uganda’s criminal justice system. Introduced under the 1902 Order in Council during colonial rule, assessors were intended to advise judges on local customs and practices, ensuring that judicial decisions aligned with cultural norms.
They also served as representatives of the community, reinforcing the principle that justice should not only be done but also seen to be done.
JUDICIARY ANNUAL PERFORMANCE
Court assessors in Uganda were introduced under the 1902 Order in Council (OIC) to assist colonial judges in interpreting Ugandan customs and applying the repugnancy test, which assessed whether local customs were compatible with principles of natural justice, morality, and colonial legal standards.
This system aimed to bridge the gap between colonial legal frameworks and local traditions, ensuring fairness in cases involving native litigants.
The role of court assessors was later codified in Ugandan law, particularly under the Trial on Indictments Act (TIA), Cap. 25, which mandates their presence in criminal trials before the High Court.
According to Section 4 of the TIA, all High Court criminal trials must be conducted with the assistance of at least two or more assessors, who are required to offer opinions on matters of fact.
However, their advice is non¬binding, with the presiding judge retaining ultimate decision-making authority. Additionally, Section 83 of the TIA requires judges to sum up the law and evidence to assessors and record their opinions before delivering a verdict.
The Constitution of Uganda, 1995, as amended, also emphasises the importance of fairness and substantive justice in its provisions. Article 28 guarantees a right to a fair hearing, while Article 126(2)(e) highlights that substantive justice should be administered without undue regard to technicalities.
These provisions underscore the intended role of assessors in ensuring that justice is not only done but also seen to be done, reinforcing public confidence in the judiciary. However, the system faces significant challenges. Court assessors often lack formal training, resulting in inconsistent contributions to trials.
CASE FOR AI IN UGANDA’S CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM
As of 2023, over 80% of companies globally reported using AI to enhance operations, with a Statista survey indicating that industries utilise around 20% of AI functions. The judicial sector is following suit, with many countries gradually adopting AI technologies.
In Africa, progress has been slow but steady, with only Morocco and Tanzania integrating AI systems into their judicial frameworks, according to Law Hub. This gradual adoption was a key focus of a recent masterclass, which explored AI’s role and potential within judicial systems.
The global rise of artificial intelligence (AI) presents opportunities to address inefficiencies in judicial systems. According to the Artificial Intelligence and The Future of Judicial Systems in Africa Report (2024), several African countries have made strides in AI adoption.
Morocco utilises AI to transcribe rulings, conduct research, retrieve archived texts, and plans to automate recording and transcribing court sessions, addressing linguistic challenges with Darija and Amazigh. Tanzania introduced an AI system for transcriptions and translations, enabling real-time and accurate handling of Kiswahili dialects and English across the mainland and Zanzibar.
Egypt announced plans to deploy an AI-powered speech-to-text system in courtrooms, automating session records and enhancing transcript efficiency. Globally, AI has proven its value in addressing issues such as case backlog, subjective bias, and inefficiencies in legal proceedings.
The use of AI in the administration of justice is no longer futuristic, as countries like China demonstrate its transformative potential. China’s “206 System,” officially called the “Trial-centered Litigation Reform Software,” serves as an AI-powered judicial assistant designed to enhance courtroom efficiency and decision-making.
The system assists judges by analysing evidence, identifying inconsistencies, and suggesting potential sentencing options based on case details. Its transcribing identifying evidence inconsistencies, and providing real-time legal analysis during hearings.
This system is part of China’s broader “smart court” initiative, and implementing a similar system in Uganda could significantly replace many of the advisory functions traditionally carried out by court assessors. Such a system would streamline judicial processes while enhancing transparency, efficiency, and overall effectiveness in Uganda’s justice system.
BENEFITS OF REPLACING COURT ASSESSORS WITH AI ASSISTANTS IN UGANDA
Drawing from the successes of AI adoption in other countries, Uganda can modernise its judicial processes while addressing longstanding inefficiencies associated with court assessors.
IMPROVED EFFICIENCY AND REDUCED BACKLOGS:
With over 26.32% of Uganda’s pending cases in the Judiciary’s Annual Performance Report FY 2023/24 classified as backlogs, such technology could streamline workflows and reduce case processing times dramatically.
IMPARTIAL DECISION-MAKING:
In Uganda, this could enhance the fairness of trials by providing consistent, unbiased support to judges while eliminating the variability introduced by assessors with limited training.
ENHANCED ACCESS TO JUSTICE:
AI in Uganda could address challenges posed by the country’s linguistic diversity, allowing seamless communication and improved access for litigants from all regions.
TRANSPARENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY:
Implementing such a system in Uganda would build public confidence by making court processes more transparent and accountable compared to the subjective contributions of court assessors.
COST-EFFECTIVENESS
In Uganda, shifting from human assessors to AI systems could reduce administrative burdens and resource demands over time.
DATA-DRIVEN INSIGHTS FOR JUDICIAL REFORMS:
In Uganda, such insights could help address systemic inefficiencies and inform resource allocation, ultimately improving the overall functioning of the judiciary.
CONCLUSION
Integrating AI-powered judicial assistants into Uganda’s judiciary aligns seamlessly with the existing Electronic Court Case Management Information System (ECCMIS), which is already transforming court operations through digitisation.
AI can enhance ECCMIS by automating case analysis, predicting case outcomes, and streamlining administrative tasks, such as scheduling and document management. By embedding AI capabilities within ECCMIS, Uganda can leverage data- driven insights to address inefficiencies, improve case tracking, and ensure more consistent decision-making.
This integration would not only accelerate the resolution of cases but also strengthen transparency and accountability within the judiciary. As Uganda continues its ICT-driven judicial modernisation process, incorporating AI into ECCMIS represents a critical next step toward a more advanced, efficient, and accessible justice system.
However, challenges in implementing such systems must be anticipated. These include the high initial cost of adoption, the need for robust digital infrastructure, and concerns about data privacy and algorithmic biases. Additionally, resistance from stakeholders, including legal practitioners and the public, may arise due to a lack of understanding of AI’s role and benefits.
To overcome these challenges, Uganda must invest in capacity building, public awareness campaigns, digital literacy and the development of a legal framework to govern AI’s use in judicial processes.
Despite these hurdles, integrating AI into Uganda’s justice system is a necessary and urgent reform. The inefficiencies and delays caused by the current reliance on court assessors highlight the critical need for innovation.
By adopting AI-powered judicial assistants and fully integrating them into ICT systems like ECCMIS, Uganda can create a more efficient, fair, and transparent judicial system that ensures timely justice for all, aligning the country with global best practices in judicial modernisation. The potential benefits far outweigh the challenges, making this transition an essential step toward a more effective justice system.
In September, 2024, we collaborated on a transformative campaign to get the Uganda Law Society “Back On Track” and deliver our shared vision of a “Radical New Bar” centred around the 4Ds: Decolonisation, Demilitarisation, Democratisation, and Digital Transformation. In less than four months of office, our collaborative efforts have successfully achieved the first three Ds.
The time is now ripe for digital transformation, with our initial focus on streamlining court processes, easing advocate enrollment procedures, and simplifying the renewal of practicing certificates.
We look forward to exploring these initiatives and our broader digital agenda in the forthcoming series.
The authors are members of Uganda Law Society
Leave a comment