Would Kiwanuka be proud of the Judiciary?

During his time as Chief Justice,  his last attempt at restoring the rule of law was to accept to hear a case of a British national and businessman, who had been held incommunicado in Makindye Military Barracks on the orders of president Idi Amin. Kiwanuka issued a court order for the British national to be brought to court. He acquitted the suspect on grounds that the army had no powers to detain a civilian. By that bold action in defence of the rule of law, the Chief Justice had inadvertently signed his own death warrant.  Kiwanuka was abducted from his chambers in the High Court, allegedly by security agents, and has never been seen again.

This raises issues of independence of the Judiciary. Article 128 of the 1995 Constitution provides for the independence of the Judiciary.  This independence means it should have the freedom to make decisions and judgments without fear or interference from the Executive or Legislative arms of government.  Our Judiciary has had a long history of political interference, which sometimes leads to a compromised system of justice. However, the Judiciary has made significant strides in recent years towards achieving independence. One of the ways through which independence is realised is through budgetary allocations. The Judiciary must have sufficient financial support to function effectively.

The administration of the Judiciary Act, 2020,  which was enacted by Parliament to give effect to Chapter Eight of the Constitution relating to the Judiciary, is a great move towards protecting the independence of the Judiciary.

This law makes provision for retirement benefits of judicial officers, which include a monthly pension equivalent to 80 percent of their last monthly salary for life, a gratuity equivalent to 30 percent of their annual salary multiplied by their years of service, among others. There was a time when the welfare of judicial officers was a concern for everyone and fronted as an explanation for unethical conduct. However, things seem to be slowly but surely changing to the extent that many young and older lawyers fight to work with the Judiciary.

During the memorial lecture, Chief Justice Alfonse Owiny-Dollo reminded us that we now have 81 High Court judges, 86 registrars, 92 chief magistrates, and 371 Grade One magistrates. I am, however, hesitant to believe that he forgot to further remind us that we have only nine justices of the Supreme Court and 12 justices of the Court of Appeal with a huge case backlog.

With recent innovations, court processes are being simplified through the use of ICT facilities such as video conferencing and Electronic Court Case Management Information System (ECCMIS) in the delivery of justice in order to make courts more accessible and user-friendly. Today, there’s enhanced use of alternative justice systems such as mediation, small claims and plea bargaining. With such intentional efforts, the Judiciary’s performance will continue improving.

The protection of judges from arbitrary dismissal or removal is essential. Judicial officers must be free from any form of intimidation or victimisation because of their decisions or personal beliefs.

In conclusion, Kiwanuka left an indelible mark in Uganda’s political and constitutional history through his contributions to the fight for independence, commitment to democracy, equality and his stand against corruption. His legacy should continue to inspire many for a better Uganda.

The writer is a human rights and non-profit law attorney

[email protected]