Prime
Lawyers attack judge over odd ruling
Judge Choudry during the annual judges conference in Kampala early this year. He is on the spot over ordering partners in a Kampala law firm to bear part of the Shs37 billion bill in a case they lost. PHOTO BY FAISWAL KASIRYE
What you need to know:
High Court Judge Singh Choudry, in his judgement, ordered the lawyers who lost a case to pay part of the costs of their client.
KAMPALA
High Court Judge Singh Choudry is on the spot over ordering partners in a law firm to bear part of the Shs37 billion bill in a case they lost.
Lawyers yesterday said the conduct of Justice Choudry is offensive to the judicial oath of administering justice without ill-will. “The orders directed against Counsel in that suit and against the Uganda Law Society are clearly vindictive and not based on any known law or practice in Uganda,” the Uganda Law Society (ULS) said on Friday in a statement.
New ULS president Ruth Sebatindira said the conduct by Justice Choudry renews the ULS call for the appointment of a tribunal to investigate his appointment and removal as Judge of the High Court “because the conduct by Justice Choudry is a serious threat to the administration of justice in Uganda.”
Day after judgment
The statement comes hardly a day after the judge (Choudry) delivered a judgement in a case and ordered Mr James Nangwala and Mr Alex Rezida, the partners in the firm of Nangwala, Rezida & Company Advocates, together with their client to pay amounts in excess of Shs37 billion to the plaintiffs as alleged damages. However, the two lawyers were not parties but only representing a party to the suit.
Ms Nangwala, Rezida & Company Advocates was handling the case number HCCS 179 of 2002; Baleke Kayira Peter & 400 others against Attorney General and two others, which matter was allocated to Justice Choudry. The company is also representing the ULS in a pending petition in the Constitutional Court since 2012 that is seeking for orders relating to the appointment of a tribunal to investigate the question of the appointment and removal of Justice Choudry from the Bench.
According to the ULS, the law firm sought the judge’s refusal from the matter on account of a number of matters but he allegedly declined to do so and continued to hear the case. The ULS statement indicates that Justice Choudry further denied the lawyers the right to appeal unless the said sum was first paid in full to Court.
He also ordered the Inspectorate of Government (IGG) and the Directorate of Public Prosecutions (DPP) to commence proceedings against the said lawyers together with Mr Urban Tibamanya and Mr Kodoli Wanyama.
The judge also ordered that in the alternative, the Shs37 billion be recovered from ULS by way of a charging order against the assets of ULS, “which was itself not a party to this suit.”
“Mr Choudry further wants to be kept notified of any further progress after delivering the judgement,” said Ms Sebatindira, promising that ULS, together with those affected, will take steps to immediately seek appropriate redress against the judge’s decision.
