Judiciary In Uganda: A failing pillar of justice beyond 2026

By Oweyegha-Afunaduula and the Center for Critical Thinking and Alternative Analysis

1. Introduction: The Judiciary at a Crossroads

The Ugandan judiciary, established to be an independent arbiter of justice and a check on executive power, stands at a critical juncture. Mounting evidence suggests that it is progressively failing to fulfil its constitutional mandate. This essay argues that, unless urgent and fundamental reforms are undertaken, the judiciary will not add value to justice in Uganda beyond 2026.

Instead, it risks becoming the greatest burden to justice, entrenching a system where the rule of law is subordinated to political loyalty and executive command. The problem is rooted in the country’s constitutional design, which concentrates excessive power in the presidency, and in a culture of executive interference that has systematically eroded judicial independence.

2. The Constitutional Foundation: A Presidency Above the Law

The 1995 Constitution, drafted under the stewardship of President Yoweri Museveni, created a system that centralises power in the executive. Although the text proclaims judicial independence (Article 128), in practice the presidency holds overwhelming sway over the other branches. This concentration of authority has fostered a culture of presidentialism – a belief that the president is indispensable and untouchable.

President Museveni’s 1997 remark that “a piece of paper (a ballot paper) cannot remove him from power” exemplifies this mindset, a statement that would be treasonable in a functioning democracy but which the judiciary has been powerless to address. Similarly, the treasonable comment by General Muhoozi Kainerugaba that “civilians will never rule” underscores the perceived impunity of the executive and its allies. The constitutional shield that protects the president from being summoned before any Ugandan court effectively neuters the judiciary’s ability to hold the highest office accountable.

3. The Appointment Trap: Loyalty Over Merit

The President’s power to appoint all judicial officers – from the Chief Justice down to magistrates – creates a structural dependency that prioritises loyalty over merit. Judges who display independence often face severe consequences. The most glaring example is Justice Esther Kisaakye, who dissented in the 2021 presidential election petition.

She argued that the petitioner, Robert Kyagulanyi, had been deprived of his right to prepare his case due to illegal house arrest. For this act of professional integrity, she faced disciplinary proceedings, had her salary suspended, and was ultimately forced to flee the country. This case sends a chilling message to the entire judiciary: conformity with the executive’s wishes is the safest career path.

4. Political Cases and Executive Interference

The judiciary’s helplessness in politically sensitive cases is repeatedly demonstrated:

• The Kidnapping and Military Trial of Kizza Besigye: In November 2024, opposition leader Kizza Besigye was abducted from Nairobi and rendered to Uganda without any extradition process. Despite his objection, he was charged in a military court. His lawyers argued that the alleged offences occurred outside Uganda and that a civilian court should have jurisdiction, but the court martial overruled them. The judiciary has been unable to provide a remedy for this blatant violation of due process and international law.
• Electoral Petitions Dismissed on Technicalities: The pattern of dismissing election challenges on procedural grounds, rather than engaging with the substance, is a long-standing tradition. In 1997, a petition by Dr James Rwanyarare and the author was dismissed as time-barred. In the ongoing 2026 petition filed by former presidential candidate Robert Kasibante, the Supreme Court has already rejected a request for an adjournment to gather crucial evidence, citing strict constitutional timelines. The government’s lawyers have labelled the petition “dead on arrival”, signalling the likely outcome.
• Endless Delays in Environmental and Public‑Interest Cases: In 2007, the National Association of Professional Environmentalists (NAPE) sued the government for allowing gypsum mining in Queen Elizabeth National Park. The presiding judge acknowledged the merit of the case but has never delivered a ruling – a delay of nearly two decades that effectively denies justice.

5. The Erosion of Judicial Authority: Ceding Power to the Military

A profound indicator of the judiciary’s declining stature is its acquiescence to the militarisation of justice. In January 2025, the Supreme Court rightly ruled that trying civilians in military courts is unconstitutional. However, by June 2025, President Museveni had signed into law the UPDF (Amendment) Act, which once again allows civilians to be tried in military courts under certain circumstances.

This move directly contradicts the Supreme Court’s ruling and demonstrates that the executive can simply legislate around inconvenient judicial decisions. As a UN official warned, this law risks being used to persecute government critics. By failing to assert its authority, the judiciary is complicit in the transfer of its core function to a non‑independent military tribunal system.

6. Forward‑Looking Analysis: Why the Judiciary Will Continue to Fail

Looking beyond 2026, the trajectory is clear. The combination of constitutional design, executive‑control over appointments, systematic intimidation of independent‑minded judges, and the militarisation of justice creates a self‑reinforcing cycle. Judges who wish to retain their positions or secure promotion will have ever‑stronger incentives to rule in favour of the government. The judiciary is becoming “clogged by NRM cadres,” as President Museveni himself once advocated. In this environment, the judiciary transforms from a pillar of justice into a burden on justice – a costly institution that legitimises oppression rather than remedying it.

7. The Way Out: A Blueprint for Reform

To avert this bleak future, a comprehensive reform agenda is imperative. These reforms must be deep, structural, and pursued with urgency:

1. Constitutional Amendment: Amend the Constitution to de‑link judicial appointments from the presidency. A truly independent Judicial Service Commission, with representation from the legal profession, civil society, and the legislature, should recommend candidates for judicial office.
2. Secure Judicial Tenure and Benefits: Guarantee the security of tenure and financial independence of judges. Disciplinary proceedings must be transparent, fair, and insulated from political manipulation, as required by international standards.
3. Strengthen the Judicial Service Commission: Empower the Commission to manage appointments, promotions, and discipline without executive interference.
4. Roll Back Military Jurisdiction: Repeal the provisions of the UPDF Act that allow trials of civilians in military courts. Uganda must adhere to the Supreme Court’s ruling and international law, which hold that military courts should not have jurisdiction over civilians.
5. Civil‑Society and International Vigilance: Support the work of the Uganda Law Society, the International Commission of Jurists, and other watchdog groups that document interference and advocate for independence. The international community should consistently link aid and cooperation to measurable progress on judicial independence.
6. Public Education and Advocacy: Launch a sustained public campaign to educate citizens about the role of an independent judiciary in a democracy. A judiciary that enjoys popular legitimacy is harder to subvert.
7. Conclusion

The Ugandan judiciary is on a path to irrelevance as a guardian of justice. The 1995 constitutional framework, combined with decades of executive overreach, has produced a judiciary that is often unable or unwilling to check power. The cases of Justice Kisaakye, Kizza Besigye, Robert Kasibante, and the approval of military trials for civilians are not isolated incidents; they are symptoms of a systemic disease. Without the courageous reforms outlined above, the judiciary will not add value to justice beyond 2026. It will instead become a monument to the victory of power over principle. The choice is stark: reform the judiciary or watch it become the greatest burden to justice in Uganda.

For God and My Country.