Here’s why the Uganda Law Society boycotted Owiny-Dollo’s thanksgiving

The author (R) with Chief Justice Alfonse Owiny-Dollo

On Saturday, July 12, 2025, Chief Justice Alfonse Chigamoy Owiny-Dollo held a thanksgiving party in Patongo, Agaro district.

In a parallel move, I addressed a day-long digital town hall hosted on X (formerly Twitter) by Egesa Ronald Leonard. For those who missed the show, here are the 17 reasons for the ULS boycott.

ABUSE OF PUBLIC RESOURCES

Public funds allocated to the thanksgiving party, by the judiciary, the presidency and government generally on “inland travel” for hundreds of its officers, could instead address pressing judicial needs, such as legal aid for the underprivileged, court infrastructure improvements, or reducing case backlogs.

Using scarce resources for a lavish celebration is an unjustifiable misuse that shortchanges citizens relying on essential judicial services. The boycott demands better resource allocation.

PREVENTING JUDICIAL CORRUPTION

We have seen Patongo cash contribution lists that surpass the statutory limit of Shs 200,000 per donor. An acting judge of the High court and the chairperson of a parastatal both donated Shs 5m.

The acting Principal Judge, who was handpicked for the job by the chief justice in April, donated Shs 3m. An anonymous donor contributed Shs 2m. A consortium of magistrates from Amuru and Nwoya districts contributed Shs 500,000.

Contrary to Section 12 of the Leadership Code Act, the Chief Justice neither disclosed these prohibited gifts to the Inspector General of Government, nor had them deposited into the consolidated fund.

Clearly, this event facilitated corrupt practices that compromise judicial integrity, such as prohibited gift-giving or favour-trading. Our boycott is a proactive rejection of such corruption.

WASTING JUDICIAL TIME

The time spent by judges, lawyers, and court staff preparing for and attending this event detracts from resolving cases and advancing legal reforms. The judiciary’s priority should be delivering justice, not organising social gatherings.

Our boycott condemns this misallocation of valuable time and effort.

EXPOSURE TO CORRUPT INFLUENCES

High-profile social events like Patongo create opportunities for lobbying and undue influence by powerful attendees, compromising judicial impartiality.

According to principle 4.4 of the Uganda Code of Judicial Conduct, a judicial officer must avoid environments that could compromise their independence. Our boycott signals a firm stance against such risks.

DISCONNECT FROM PUBLIC NEEDS

The extravagant thanksgiving party of the chief justice at Patongo highlights the judiciary’s detachment from ordinary Ugandans who grapple with delayed justice and underfunded courts.

This self-indulgent display alienates the public and reinforces perceptions of an elitist, out-of-touch legal system. Our boycott calls for a citizen-focused judiciary.

LACK OF TRANSPARENCY

The funding and planning of the chief justice’s Patongo party was regrettably shrouded in secrecy, which raises red flags about potential mismanagement of funds or hidden motives. From which court users did the organizers solicit donations for this event?

The judiciary must exemplify transparency. Moreover, Owiny-Dollo appears to have violated principle 4.3 of the Uganda Code of Judicial Conduct by exploiting the prestige of judicial office for his private interests, and by conveying the impression that the organizers of this party are in a special position to influence his performance of judicial duties.

The boycott denounces such opaque and unethical practices and heralds the end of grand displays of opulence and profligacy by the judiciary.

DISTRACTION FROM URGENT JUDICIAL ISSUES

Judiciary thanksgiving parties have lately become fashionable but they insidiously shift focus away from pressing challenges like runaway case backlogs, paralyzing court inefficiencies, and the dire need for radical reform.

By boycotting Patongo, the Radical New Bar emphasizes that the judiciary should address substantive issues, not indulge in frivolous celebrations.

UNDERMINING PUBLIC TRUST

Extravagant, publicly funded extravaganzas fuel cynicism, portraying the judiciary as self-serving rather than justice-oriented. The boycott challenges this perception and works to restore public confidence in the legal system.

CONFLICT WITH PROFESSIONAL ETHICS

Participation in such events contradicts the ethical duty of judicial officers and lawyers to prioritize integrity and public interest. The boycott reinforces the profession’s commitment to principle over indulgence.

DEMAND FOR SYSTEMIC REFORM

The ULS finds no justification in participating in a judiciary celebratory event in the wake of the malicious and unlawful deletion of four of its critical appeals from the Court of Appeal cause list.

The boycott protests a judiciary that tolerates wasteful and compromising practices. It reflects the Radical New Bar’s call for a reformed judicial system focused on accountability, transparency, and justice for all, rather than vanity projects.

RISK OF JUDICIAL CAPTURE

Contrary to principles 4.4 and 4.6 of the Uganda Code of Judicial Conduct, the Patongo event impermissibly serves as a platform for political or corporate interests—exemplified by the undisclosed donations—to gain favour with the judiciary, risking its capture.

The ULS boycott sends a strong message against the proliferation of such events that threaten to undermine judicial autonomy.

THREAT OF JUDICIAL POLITICIZATION

With the triumphalist attendance and participation of the NRM national chairperson at the start of the electioneering season, the Patongo party irrefutably advances a political agenda, and aligns the judiciary with the executive, thereby threatening its neutrality.

Our boycott resists this politicization and defends judicial impartiality and integrity, in accordance with principles 2.2 and 4.6 of the Uganda Code of Judicial Conduct.

EROSION OF JUDICIAL INDEPENDENCE

Residents of Patongo discovered why image-conscious judicial officers may hesitate to offend influential individuals (e.g. politicians, clergy, soldiers, the business community, and other elites) they would wish to invite to a career-ending thanksgiving celebration.

Against a backdrop of well-documented concerns of runaway corruption in the Ugandan judiciary, ongoing displays of pomp at Patongo exacerbate the urban-rural divide and further erode public trust.

Our boycott is aimed at safeguarding public confidence in the integrity of the judiciary, by upholding its reputation as an autonomous, principled institution. Participation in a perceived vanity project diminishes the public’s view of judicial independence.

NEED FOR JUDICIAL HUMILITY

The judiciary should embody humility and service to the public, not self- celebration or self-indulgence. Boycotting the chief justice’s thanksgiving Party promotes a humble, citizen-focused legal system.

OWINY-DOLLO’S DESPERATE GAMBIT

The Patongo thanksgiving party appears to be Owiny-Dollo’s attempt to polish his 17-year judicial record (2008-2025), in which the Supreme court consistently lagged behind all the other courts in national performance.

It is likely a bid to secure favour for a retirement age extension or post-retirement appointment, rather than a genuine celebration of service. Unlike the former Kenyan chief justice Willy Mutunga’s dignified exit one year ahead of his scheduled retirement to facilitate a credible transition in the top judiciary job during the 2016/2017 electioneering season, Dollo’s insistence that he will retire on January 18, 2026 at the critical phase of Uganda’s 2025/2026 general elections raises many questions about his motives.

BETRAYAL AND DECEPTION IN PATONGO

Owiny-Dollo’s jubilant celebration of his Kampala-based career starkly contrasts with the North’s unaddressed traumas and injustices.

His silence on rampant poverty, the NRA/ LRA massacres and displacement of the residents of Patongo, Kalongo, Bur Coro, Atiak, Acol Pii, etc and persistent systemic disparities recorded in national surveys speaks volumes about his priorities.

We boycott his thanksgiving party to demand accountability, justice and genuine concern for the north’s plight. We refuse to participate in empty festivities that ignore the region’s historical wounds and ongoing struggles.

A CALL FOR ETERNAL VIGILANCE

Lastly, our boycott is a stand against Owiny-Dollo’s past scandals, such as the four-year harassment of Justice Esther Kisaakye, his tirade of hate speech against Buganda and her perceived political agents in March 2022, the unjustified closure of the Supreme court for nearly the whole of 2022 without improvising alternative premises, his draconian anti-Covid-19 guidelines that fumbled the opportunity to digitatally transform the Ugandan courts, and his infamous new law year speech on February 7, 2025 proclaiming a ban against the ULS and its Radical New Bar president.

Owiny-Dollo’s judgments also fell short jurisprudentially, for instance his denunciation of participatory democracy and condonation of violence in the law-making process in the age-limit case, and his injudicious sanctioning of appellate injunctions that froze constitutional remedies for several victims of military overreach in the Kabaziguruka case, and of a broken criminal justice system as exemplified in the Kazinda case.

But above all else, it is his penchant for delay in the disposal of constitutional cases like the Acting Judges case which has drastically dented the integrity and independence of the judiciary. Boycotting his thanksgiving party is a stand against repeating such excesses and a call for vigilance