How Uganda’s judiciary balances power, and the pursuit of fairness

Inside Uganda’s courthouses last week, the air was thick with tension. Courtrooms overflowed with lawyers, defendants, journalists, and ordinary citizens craning to hear verdicts and rulings that seemed to carry the weight of more than just individual fates.

From high-profile bail hearings to landmark domestic judgments, the country’s justice system found itself once again at the center of public debate, its integrity tested, its independence scrutinized, and its relevance affirmed.

Pastor Robert Kayanja’s sodomy allegations resurface

The trial involving allegations that youths falsely accused Pastor Robert Kayanja of sodomy continues to generate controversy.

In a significant ruling last month, the High court upheld a ban on live media broadcasts. No audio or video streaming is permitted, though accredited journalists may attend and publish written reports.

The restrictions stem from concerns about sensationalism and distortion, especially on social media platforms like TikTok. Justice David Matovu emphasized that lifting the ban mid-trial could jeopardize witness testimony and fairness, particularly as the defense’s investigation now commences.

Defense counsel had argued that the ban undermined transparency during their phase, but the ruling prevailed to preserve procedural integrity. More recently, a surety was remanded. Prossy Namugga, the mother of the accused Emmanuel Moses Tumwine, failed to account for her son’s whereabouts after he jumped bail about a year ago.

The court remanded her until September 5, 2025, and reminded her of her Shs 20 million surety obligation. Tumwine remains at large, while the court signaled no leniency. Adding to the tension, the Chief State Attorney, Jonathan Muwaganya, sternly cautioned TikTok user Elizabeth Nampiima, also known as “Olivia Kateme,” who had been serializing court proceedings online in violation of the media ban.

The judge warned her to stop, even suggesting she find alternative income avenues, and stated that they would pursue formal action if necessary. The fifth accused person in the case then gave their testimony about how they came to be involved.

Alex Wakamala, 30, a boda boda rider, had joined various crusades, including the 77 days of revival meetings at Rubaga, where he was encouraged by others to go into police training. After training, he got into church security and safety.

The prosecution argues that Wakamala and eight others conspired to falsely accuse Pastor Kayanja of sodomy. The trial continues.

NALUKOOLA JOINS THE DEFENSE TABLE

Frank Ntambi is a prominent Ugandan media commentator and former head of the Equal Opportunities Commission. He is also a vocal critic of government policies, often stirring controversy on social media.

Ntambi faces allegations of malicious damage and spreading false information stemming from a dispute with a music promoter. These are contested claims, which his defense counsel, notably lawyer Elias Luyimbazi Nalukoola, dismisses as “fabricated.”

Nalukoola himself is a politically prominent figure, having recently filed a lawsuit alleging he was tortured by Uganda’s anti-terrorism task force during his political nomination process.

Ntambi was granted bail under stringent conditions: Shs 500,000 in cash plus three sureties each bonded at Shs 5 million. One surety was the Makindye mayor. Nalukoola labeled the charges “fabricated” and aims for an acquittal when the case resumes on October 2, 2025.

THE SCAMMER’S BAIL DENIED 

Tigist Ayalew Melkamu, an Ethiopian national, is accused of orchestrating a land-related investment fraud in Kampala.

Alongside her are two Ugandan lawyers: Bob Mwanjuzi, 41, of Gangu, Makindye Ssabagabo, and Lawrence Kalamu, 29, of Namasuba. Both are facing charges. The case also includes Sisay Bekure Melkamu (another Ethiopian), who remains at large, prompting the issuance of arrest warrants.

The accused allegedly conspired to defraud businesswoman Kalpana Abe of Shs 917 million. The fraud centered on a forged land lease agreement, supposedly between SEMA Holding Limited and Ephrata Investments Group Limited, dated April 20, 2023.

Between January and August 2023, they allegedly used the fabricated lease to persuade Ms. Abe to invest, claiming she would own a 10-year land lease worth the investment. Ayalew is further accused of conducting business illegally in Uganda without a valid work permit from 2021 to May 2025.

She purportedly served as director of Ephrata Investments and also managed two Kampala nightspots, Hide Out Lounge and Circuit Lounge. Ayalew, Mwanjuzi, and Kalamu are all facing multiple charges: Forgery, Uttering false documents, Conspiracy to commit a felony, and obtaining money by false pretense.

At their initial appearance, they were remanded to Luzira Prison pending trial. Their bail application was subsequently declined due to insufficient sureties and concerns over potential flight risk, especially in Ayalew’s case.

The court noted that none of the sureties had demonstrated adequate financial capacity to cover such a vast amount should the accused abscond. The next bail hearing is scheduled for September 10, 2025, pending the presentation of more credible sureties.

LANDMARK JUDGMENTS BREAK JUDICIAL GROUND

SSENUNI MOHAMED AND OTHERS V KCCA

In a judgment with direct implications for the labor market, the court ruled that fixed-term employees of the Kampala Capital City Authority (KCCA) could not claim permanent status or terminal benefits unless such rights were explicitly written into their contracts or statutes.

The plaintiffs had argued that after serving multiple renewable contracts, they deserved to be absorbed as permanent employees. The court disagreed, holding that a fixed-term contract ends when its term expires unless Parliament legislates otherwise. Uganda’s labor market is rife with short-term contracts, particularly in government agencies and NGOs.

Workers often see renewal as a path to permanency. This ruling dashes that as- sumption, affirming that contract law governs employment relationships. While employers hailed the clarity, labor activists fear the judg- ment could entrench job insecurity.

Uganda v Mukuye Christopher: Burden of Proof in Murder Trials.

In Uganda v Mukuye Christopher, the High Court acquitted the accused of murder after concluding that the state’s case leaned heavily on circumstantial evidence and hearsay. The ruling reaffirmed one of criminal law’s bedrock principles: that the prosecution bears the burden of proving guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

The court stressed that suspicion, however strong, cannot substitute for hard evidence. Witnesses had testified about quarrels and neighborhood disputes, but none placed Mukuye at the crime scene at the time of the crime.

The acquittal is not merely a reprieve for the accused but a signal to prosecutors: investigations must be thorough, evidence air-tight, and reliance on conjecture curbed. Twesigyire Robert v Tukwasibwe Julius Another key judgment involved Twesigyire Robert v Tukwasibwe Julius, a dispute that spiraled from a local council land ruling to the High Court.

The appeal was dismissed because the appellant failed to seek proper leave before escalating the matter. The court clari- fied that appeals from Local Council Courts must follow the Local Council Courts Act, not outdated civil procedure provisions.

This ruling seems technical, but its implications are broad: countless land and property disputes in Uganda originate at the LC level, and confusion about appeal pathways has long clogged the system.

By clarifying procedure, the court helps reduce case backlogs and prevents the abuse of process.

Joyce Loumo Choudry v Musinguzi Henry Bitature & Another

Perhaps the most socially charged case was Joyce Loumo Choudry v Musinguzi Henry Bitature, a case over whether DNA testing should be permitted to determine rightful heirs in an estate dispute.

Loumo Choudry had sought to block the exhumation of a body for DNA extraction, claiming irreparable harm. The Court of Appeal dismissed her application, noting that she had not demonstrated a strong likelihood of success.

Estate disputes are common in Uganda, where polygamy and customary marriages complicate succession. This ruling under- scores that DNA evidence is increasingly indispensable in resolving such claims.

By refusing to halt exhumation, the court embraced science as a neutral arbiter in emotionally charged inheritance battles. It also sends a message that no individual can shield an estate from scrutiny when legitimate claims exist.

VANTAGE MEZZAININE FUND II Vs SIMBA PROPERTIES 

In 2014, Vantage Mezzanine Fund II, a South African private equity firm, loaned $10 million to Simba Properties Investment Company Ltd (owned by high-profile Ugandan businessman Patrick Bitature) to support real estate and hospitality expansion.

The loan was secured via charges and share pledges over Simba’s affiliated companies. When Simba defaulted, it attempted to block enforcement and send the matter to arbitration. Simultaneously, Vantage sought share registration through the Uganda Registration Services Bureau (URSB).

The High Court, in 2022, denied Vantage’s registration and lawsuit capacity, arguing that as a foreign partnership not registered under the Partnerships Act or Business Names Registration Act, it lacked legal standing in Uganda.

On August 22, 2025, the Court of Appeal overturned the High Court’s decision in a unanimous judgment delivered by Justice Esta Nambayo, with Justice Frederick Egonda-Ntende.

The court held that merely lending money to a Ugandan entity does not amount to “carrying on business in Uganda,” thus not triggering mandatory registration requirements.

Vantage was therefore permitted to enforce its contractual rights, including through the courts, despite its foreign status. Justice Nambayo emphasized that deny- ing Vantage access to court violated Article 21(1) of the Constitution, which mandates equal protection under the law.

New Guardians of the Bench: Judiciary Expands

In a strategic move aimed at fortifying Uganda’s judicial capacity and hasten- ing case resolutions, President Museveni this year appointed a significant cadre of 11 judges and three registrars to the High Court.

DPP Jane Abodo was elevated to principal judge. The 11 Judges include Justice Makumbi David, Samson Lwokya, Lady Justice Kania Rosette Comfort, Lady Justice Rubagumya Tumusiime Patience, Lady Justice Naluzze Aisha Batala, Lady Justice Jacqueline Mwondha, Justice Farouq Lubega, Lady Justice Dr Akello Echookit Christine, Justice Kwizera Amos, Lady Justice Nabakooza Flavia, Justice Mwaka Phillip Willebrord, Justice Karemani Jamson Karemera.

The three registrars are Her Worship Agnes Alum, Her Worship Tusiime Sarah Bashaija Barungi, and Her Worship Justin Atukwas.

ashleymwesigye@gmail.com

Related