In a landmark ruling, the High Court of Uganda has dismissed an application by the Uganda Law Society (ULS) and lawyer Isaac Kimaze Ssemakadde seeking to add the Attorney General as a party to ongoing judicial review proceedings over the controversial Executive Order RNB No. 1 of 2024. Justice Esta Nambayo delivered the decision, citing procedural irregularities and insufficient grounds for the proposed joinder.
The dispute stems from an executive order issued on October 14, 2024, by Mr. Ssemakadde, then president of the ULS. The directive expelled the Attorney General and the Solicitor General from the ULS Council, citing alleged constitutional conflicts under Section 9 of the Uganda Law Society Act.
This prompted a judicial review application (MC No. 228 of 2024) from ULS members Tony Tumukunde and Joshua Byamazima, arguing that the order violated statutory provisions and principles of natural justice.
In their application (M.A No. 1178 of 2024), ULS and Mr. Ssemakadde argued that adding the Attorney General to the case would ensure a comprehensive resolution of all controversies. They emphasised that the Attorney General, as the government’s chief legal adviser, was directly affected by the executive order and must clarify the validity of Section 9 of the ULS Act.
Counsel for the respondents opposed the application, asserting it was procedurally defective. They pointed out that ULS and Mr Ssemakadde had failed to file an affidavit in reply to the main judicial review application before filing their request to join the Attorney General, violating procedural norms.
Justice Nambayo upheld this argument, ruling that the application was premature. “The Applicants cannot be heard on this application, having filed it before filing their reply to the main suit. It is my view that this application was filed prematurely,” the judge stated.
Furthermore, the court rejected the claim that the Attorney General’s involvement was necessary for determining the legality of the executive order. “The Respondents are challenging the process and not the merits of the decision. The Applicants have not demonstrated how adding the Attorney General would enhance the determination of the procedural issues at hand,” Justice Nambayo noted.
The dismissal of the application is a significant setback for the ULS leadership. It reaffirms the procedural rigour required in judicial review cases and underscores the High Court’s focus on ensuring decisions are grounded in fairness and legality.
Meanwhile, this ruling has created a pivotal moment in defining the balance of power between the ULS Council and government offices. It also highlights the complexities of navigating institutional autonomy while adhering to statutory and constitutional mandates.
Do you have a story in your community or an opinion to share with us: Email us at editorial@watchdoguganda.com
