Ssemakadde defends his “radical, not extreme” approach
Exiled Uganda Law Society (ULS) president Isaac Ssemakadde has dismissed accusations that he is extreme in his pursuit of change in Uganda’s justice system, insisting instead that his methods are “radical but necessary.”
Often described as confrontational and unapologetically bold, Ssemakadde has clashed repeatedly with the judiciary, deploying sharp language, dramatic protest, and public criticism of judges.
These tactics earned him both admiration among young lawyers and human rights defenders, and condemnation from senior judicial officers. Before fleeing the country, he faced a two-year sentence for contempt of court.
Chief Justice Alfonse Owiny-Dollo had demanded that Ssemakadde apologize to justice Musa Ssekaana and former Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) Jane Frances Abodo, whom he allegedly insulted. Ssemakadde refused.
“To be radical is not extremism, it is necessary,” he said in a recent virtual address to ULS members.
“It is common to mistake radicals for extremists because their methods may look similar. But personally, I am a radical, while some in government are extremists. Our mission is to compel power in this country to deliver justice as a constitutional right.”
Ssemakadde argues that Uganda’s prisons are filled with the poor, political opponents, and those who have merely offended the powerful. He lists land grabbing, exploitative labour, sexual harassment, racial discrimination, electoral fraud, corporate theft, and unjust taxation as the injustices the legal system should confront, yet often shields.
Through his Radical New Bar (RNB) movement, Ssemakadde has sought to “reset” the practice of law. His campaign includes pushing for every imprisoned Ugandan entitled to bail to be granted it, an effort, he argues, that would decongest prisons, reunite families, and hold corrupt interests accountable.
He sharply criticizes the judiciary’s reliance on contempt powers to stifle criticism.
“The offence of scandalising the court, which has forced me into exile, is a relic of colonial oppression, long discarded in democratic societies but revived here to silence radicals like me,” he said.
Ssemakadde’s confrontational style, including table-banging in court helped him secure the presidency of ULS. While his methods resonate with reform-minded lawyers, critics accuse him of damaging relations between the Bar and the Bench.
He counters that the justice system itself is in crisis.
“It simply doesn’t deliver. The system is engineered to serve economic and political interests that remain unchallenged,” he argued.
To Ssemakadde, access to justice is tied to wider inequalities in education, healthcare, and employment.
His Radical New Bar, he insists, “will not be silenced.” “We will remain independent, now and forever, unapologetically radical, unfalteringly bold, and irrevocably committed to justice, accountability, and freedom of expression.”
Recently, ULS boycotted the 8th Benedicto Kiwanuka Memorial Lecture, organized by the judiciary, after failing to secure speaking slots for its leadership. In a statement urging members to boycott, Ssemakadde argued that the 1972 assassination of Chief Justice Benedicto Kiwanuka had never been truly acknowledged or repaired, leaving unresolved tensions between the state and the judiciary.
As ULS marked its sixteenth Rule of Law Week, his mandate as president was extended for another six months, proof that, whether viewed as a radical reformer or an extremist agitator, Ssemakadde’s grip on Uganda’s legal fraternity endures.
Related
