Supreme Court suspends civilian trials in military court

In a landmark ruling, Justice Catherine Bamugemereire of the Supreme Court has suspended all proceedings in the General Court Martial (GCM), declaring the trial of civilians in military courts unconstitutional.

The decision marks a pivotal moment for Uganda’s legal system, prompting urgent calls for military justice reforms.

Justice Bamugemereire ruled that the General Court Martial lacks the constitutional mandate to try civilians, emphasizing that its structure and procedures violate the principles of fairness and impartiality enshrined in Uganda’s Constitution.

“Judicial power, as per the law, is vested in the judiciary, and the General Court Martial is subordinate to the judicial system,” she stated. “It is an overreach to create an offense making civilians liable for crimes under military law.”

Her ruling suspends all ongoing civilian trials in the GCM, except those involving military personnel. She further directed that all cases pending trial in the military tribunal be subjected to judicial review, placing an injunction on further proceedings.

Justice Bamugemereire’s decision follows an earlier judgment by Justice Monica Mugenyi, who, along with a panel of seven justices, ruled that Section 117(1)(h) of the Uganda People’s Defence Forces (UPDF) Act—allowing civilians to be tried in military courts—was unconstitutional.

Justice Mugenyi raised concerns about the GCM’s lack of independence and impartiality, stating, “The General Court Martial is not an independent and impartial court and is inconsistent with the Constitution.”

She further called for military court reforms, recommending that appointments to the General Court Martial be made in consultation with the Judicial Service Commission to ensure legal expertise and impartiality. While her judgment left room for amendments to the UPDF Act, she reaffirmed that civilian trials in military courts must be reconsidered.

In a decisive ruling, Justice Elizabeth Musoke became the third Supreme Court judge to reinforce limits on the General Court Martial’s authority. She concurred with Justice Mugenyi’s judgment but went further, asserting that the GCM is strictly a disciplinary body with no jurisdiction over civilians.

“The cases that may be tried here are limited to discipline, and the nature of punishment is limited to disciplinary sanctions,” she stated.

Justice Musoke emphasized that the General Court Martial lacks the fundamental attributes of a proper judicial body—such as independence and impartiality—and cannot qualify as a subordinate court under Uganda’s legal framework.

“It is erroneous to expand its jurisdiction beyond its disciplinary scope,” she ruled. “All criminal matters ought to be handled by courts of judicature.”

Her judgment also struck down Sections 119 and 179 of the UPDF Act, declaring them unconstitutional for extending the GCM’s jurisdiction beyond disciplinary offenses and improperly allowing the trial of civilians. She ruled that only UPDF personnel and disciplinary offenses fall within the GCM’s mandate. Furthermore, any military case resulting in imprisonment must be transferred to the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) for judicial review.

The Supreme Court’s rulings set the stage for significant legal reforms, ensuring that civilians are not subjected to military trials in violation of their constitutional rights.

With ongoing trials of high-profile figures, including opposition leader Dr. Kizza Besigye, under scrutiny, the judgments highlight the urgency of aligning Uganda’s military court system with constitutional principles. The rulings reinforce judicial oversight, emphasizing the need for a fair and impartial justice system.

As the legal landscape shifts, the Supreme Court has sent a clear message: Uganda’s judiciary is committed to upholding the rule of law and ensuring that justice is administered fairly and transparently for all citizens.