Big Blow To Ugandan Chief Justice Owiny-Dollo Taken to Court Over This

A legal battle has emerged in Uganda as Chief Justice Alfonse Owiny-Dollo and Justice Musa Ssekanaa face a lawsuit filed by city lawyer Yasin Sentumbwe Munagomba.

The lawyer accuses the two judges of judicial harassment and abuse of power, following demands for an apology from Uganda Law Society (ULS) President Isaac Ssemakadde.

According to Munagomba, the Chief Justice’s demand violates constitutional rights, particularly freedom of speech and fair administrative treatment.

He argues that judges, like other public officials, should be open to criticism without retaliatory actions.

The lawsuit references several constitutional provisions, including Articles 29(1) and 42, which protect freedom of expression and the right to fair administrative action.

Munagomba claims that by insisting on an apology, the Chief Justice is using his position to intimidate Ssemakadde.

He describes this as an attempt to silence a legal professional and undermine the independence of the judiciary.

Further, Munagomba highlights concerns about judicial impartiality.

He questions why cases involving Justice Ssekanaa and the ULS President are being prioritized while many other legal matters remain unresolved.

According to him, this selective approach goes against Articles 21, 28, and 126 of the Constitution, which ensure equality before the law and fair judicial processes.

In his legal filing, Munagomba also criticizes Justice Ssekanaa for failing to recuse himself from cases where he has a personal interest.

He argues that Ssekanaa’s continued involvement raises concerns about judicial bias and fairness.

He refers to Articles 2, 126, and 128, which emphasize impartiality in court proceedings.

The lawyer warns that such actions damage public trust in the judiciary.

He insists that judges should avoid situations that create a perception of favoritism or misuse of power.

Munagomba is asking the court to issue a permanent injunction preventing further judicial harassment against Ssemakadde.

Additionally, he wants a ruling that affirms the right to criticize the judiciary without fear of legal consequences.

He also calls for the courts to recognize that the offence of scandalizing the judiciary is unconstitutional.