KAMPALA, UGANDA – In a historic decision, the Supreme Court of Uganda has ruled that the trial of civilians in military courts is unconstitutional, delivering a decisive verdict in the long-contested Attorney General vs. Hon. Michael Kabaziguruka case. The judgment, handed down by a seven-member panel led by Chief Justice Alfonse Owiny-Dollo, marks the end of a contentious legal battle that has shaped Uganda’s judicial landscape for nearly four years.
The ruling upholds the 2021 Constitutional Court decision, which held that the General Court Martial (GCM) lacks jurisdiction over civilians and is only competent to discipline Uganda People’s Defence Forces (UPDF) personnel.
A Landmark Ruling
In a strongly worded judgment, Chief Justice Owiny-Dollo ruled that all ongoing, pending, and future trials of civilians before military courts must cease immediately and be transferred to civilian courts with competent jurisdiction. The Chief Justice emphasized that allowing the military judiciary to prosecute civilians threatens the integrity of the legal system and undermines constitutional democracy.
“In democratic societies, every aspect of judicial power must be exercised by a competent court. The General Court Martial does not have the training or legal qualifications to try civilians impartially,” Owiny-Dollo stated.
Judicial Concerns and Legal Arguments
Three Supreme Court justices—Catherine Bamugemereire, Elizabeth Musoke, and Percy Night Tuhaise—were particularly critical of the military court’s structure, noting that its panel lacks judicial independence, formal legal training, and the procedural safeguards necessary for fair trials.
Justice Bamugemereire went further, advocating for an immediate suspension of all Court Martial operations, except for disciplinary cases involving active-duty UPDF personnel. Justice Musoke reinforced this stance, stating that military courts were never intended to handle civilian cases, as they are inherently disciplinary institutions.
Justice Monica Mugenyi proposed that military courts should retain jurisdiction over military service offenses, while all civil offenses committed by soldiers, particularly those off-duty, should be prosecuted in civilian courts.
Implications of the Ruling
The Supreme Court’s decision has far-reaching consequences, affecting numerous high-profile cases involving civilians currently facing charges before the Court Martial, including opposition figures such as Dr. Kizza Besigye. The ruling not only reinforces judicial independence but also sets a legal precedent that will shape Uganda’s military and civilian justice systems for years to come.
The Attorney General’s appeal has officially failed, with the court awarding costs to the respondent, Hon. Michael Kabaziguruka, a former MP who was controversially tried before a military tribunal.
Call for Legal Reforms
In response to the ruling, Justice Bamugemereire called for a comprehensive amendment of the UPDF Act, ensuring that the military judicial system remains within its constitutional mandate.
Justice Tuhaise further stressed that all criminal prosecutions must be conducted by the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) and not by military prosecutors, reinforcing the need for an impartial judicial process.
A Judiciary Under Attack?
Beyond the legal arguments, Chief Justice Owiny-Dollo addressed the growing trend of public attacks on the judiciary, particularly from political actors and social media critics.
“If your purpose is to destroy the judiciary, it is like attacking democracy itself. You may not realize the value of democracy until it is taken away from you. It is like the oxygen we breathe—people take it for granted until it is cut off,” he warned.
He urged constructive engagement with the judiciary instead of sensationalized criticisms, emphasizing that respect for the courts is essential to maintaining rule of law.
The Final Verdict
As Uganda moves forward, the Supreme Court’s ruling delivers a powerful reaffirmation of civilian judicial supremacy. Effective immediately, the military court’s jurisdiction over civilians is nullified, reinforcing the principle that justice must be dispensed by qualified judicial officers in a competent court of law.
This judgment will undoubtedly redefine Uganda’s legal framework, ensuring that no civilian is ever again subjected to a military tribunal.
