MPs question judicial officers’ competence amid bail application delays

Kampala, Uganda:- Members of Parliament sitting on the Legal and Parliamentary Affairs Committee have launched a scathing attack against the Judiciary’s management of bail applications, accusing some judicial officers of incompetence and failing to uphold justice.

The heated exchange occurred during a session on Thursday, April 3, 2025, where Judiciary officials appeared before the committee to present their 2025/26 Ministerial Policy Statement. However, the discussions quickly shifted to what MPs termed as the “reckless handling” of bail applications by some judicial officers.

Hon. Abdu Katuntu (Bugweri County) and Hon. Medard Sseggona (Busiro East) led the charge, questioning both the efficiency and the integrity of the Judiciary in handling urgent bail matters. According to the lawmakers, the delays in granting or rejecting bail applications are unjustifiable and continue to undermine public confidence in the justice system.

“What is happening in our courts is a mockery of justice. How can a judicial officer adjourn a case for two weeks just to decide on a bail application?” Hon. Katuntu remarked. “Are we even sure that some of these officers deserve to be called ‘Your Worship’ or ‘My Lord’? Because what they are practicing is injustice, not justice.”

Hon. Sseggona echoed similar sentiments, calling out the Judiciary’s failure to address procedural inefficiencies that have led to unnecessary delays. “Bail is a constitutional right. We cannot have a situation where judicial officers are playing games with people’s freedoms. It is shameful,” he said.

The legislators accused certain judicial officers of deliberate incompetence, with Hon. Katuntu particularly questioning whether some of them possess the “common sense” required to make judicial decisions of such gravity.

This latest critique by Parliament comes amid an ongoing rift between the Judiciary and the Uganda Law Society (ULS), whose President, Isaac Ssemakadde, is embroiled in a legal battle which the ULS has described as “inexplicable delays” in court proceedings.

In its statement on April 3, 2025, the Lawyers’ body decried what it termed “persistent judicial delays” in handling cases involving Mr. Ssemakadde and other legal practitioners, leading to allegations of bias and incompetence. “The delays create the impression of animosity between the Judiciary and the ULS,” the statement read in part.

The ULS has particularly been vocal about what it describes as the Judiciary’s reluctance to handle cases involving Mr. Ssemakadde with the fairness and urgency they deserve.

Notably, Mr. Ssemakadde continues to face multiple arrest warrants and a two-year prison sentence handed down by Judge Musa Ssekaana over alleged derogatory remarks on social media. Despite his appeal for stay orders, the Judiciary has yet to allocate judges or set hearing dates for his pending cases.

The MPs have now called for urgent reforms within the Judiciary to address inefficiencies and restore public trust, a situation that has raised broader concerns about the accountability of judicial officers and the transparency of the system as a whole.

“There must be consequences for judicial officers who deliberately delay justice. The Judiciary must remember that the law is meant to protect the people, not to serve the egos of individual officers,” Hon. Sseggona said on Thursday.

The Busiro East MP further warned that Ugandans might be prompted to emulate their Kenyan counterparts who set Kenya’s Parliament on fire and also set Court buildings ablaze due to the declining public trust in the judicial system.

Pius Bigirimana, the Permanent Secretary to the Judiciary, apologized on behalf of the Judiciary, stating, “I want to take this opportunity to apologize on behalf of the judiciary for some of the shortcomings that have been experienced.”

“And some of them are systemic, others are for individuals in the judiciary. We do apologize. But we are not just seated, we are looking at all those areas that have got weaknesses and see how to fix them, both in the human resource and in the systems.”

Bigirimana, however, defended the monetization of bail, saying it is currently the only available means, saying, “For the time being, that’s what we have. But we shall benefit from members’ ideas. If you can come up with, for example, a proposal, you will have helped us. But for the time being, it is that.”