On Friday, 31st, the Supreme Court issued a landmark ruling regarding the trial of civilians in military courts. This decision followed a unanimous declaration from Chief Justice Alfonso Owiny-Dollo and six other judges, who concluded that General Court Martials lack the legal qualifications and independence necessary to conduct fair trials.
Owiny-Dollo likened military court judges to untrained surgeons, warning that short-term presidential appointments for military judges severely undermine their independence. He emphasized, “Without job security, their ability to dispense justice without fear or favour is compromised.”
The Supreme Court further ruled that military courts violate fundamental constitutional principles by denying defendants the right to appeal, which is essential to the guarantee of a fair trial. As a result, the Court ordered an immediate halt to all military trials involving civilians.
However, in a defiant statement, Colonel Chris Magezi, the Public Relations Manager in the Office of the Chief of Defence Forces, declared that the General Court Martial would continue to try Dr. Kizza Besigye, despite the Supreme Court’s ruling. In a message marked by capital letters, Magezi insisted:
“The GENERAL COURT MARTIAL will continue to try ANYONE who conspires to MURDER THE PRESIDENT, commits ARMED REBELLION against Uganda, and engages in TERRORISM against the PEOPLE OF UGANDA,” he said. “Under NO CIRCUMSTANCES will Colonel Kizza Besigye be RELEASED until he faces the FULL EXTENT of MARTIAL LAW.”
The UPDF’s blatant defiance of this ruling has sparked alarm among legal experts and civil society organizations. Many are concerned that such actions erode judicial independence and the supremacy of civilian institutions.
Critics argue that disregarding the authority of the Supreme Court sets a dangerous precedent, one that risks strengthening military influence over governance and further undermining democratic principles.
