Kampala – As the Uganda Law Society rushes to the Inspector General of Police crying “unlawful eviction,” one uncomfortable truth stares everyone in the face: senior advocate Fred Muwema and his firm owe more than Shs 1.4 billion in rent arrears, court-ordered damages and mesne profits. Instead of simply writing the cheque and moving on like any ordinary citizen would be forced to do, Muwema has spent years navigating legal corners, clutching at an “option to purchase” clause, filing appeals and now lecturing the public on 19th-century English case law.
The High Court Commercial Division did not mince words on February 20. Justice Patricia Mutesi ruled in Downtown Investments Ltd v M/s Muwema & Co. Advocates (HCCS No. 621 of 2023) that the 2014 lease had been lawfully terminated after repeated defaults. The firm was declared trespassers. Bailiffs, with police present, carried out the order on March 6 at Plot 50, Windsor Crescent Road, Kololo. Files were moved, furniture was loaded, the office was cleared. That is what happens when you refuse to pay rent for years.Yet hours after the locks were changed, Muwema published a lengthy opinion piece titled “Let me educate my former landlord on what the ‘option to purchase’ means.” In it, he claims that once he “exercised” the OTP, the landlord-tenant relationship magically vanished, rent obligations evaporated, and the landlord became a mere “vendor” who must now sell the property to him at the 2014 price. He drags up London & Southwestern Railway Company v Gomm (1881), a Ugandan case from Mubiru J, and foreign precedents as if centuries-old foreign rulings can erase a Shs 1.4 billion debt in 2026 Kampala.
This is classic corner-taking. Instead of paying the arrears like the court commanded, Muwema wants the landlord to accept that rent paid after the supposed OTP exercise should be “adjusted” against a purchase price that was never agreed upon. He wants specific performance of a contract the landlord has already walked away from. And while his clients’ files and court exhibits were being loaded onto trucks, he was busy drafting an appeal and a press statement.
The Uganda Law Society has now petitioned IGP Abbas Byakagaba, demanding to know which officer “assisted” the eviction and calling the operation “malicious.” ULS Vice President Anthony Asiimwe says the move risked client confidentiality and breached due process. But the real breach of due process began years ago when Muwema & Co. stopped paying rent and stayed put anyway. The court gave them every chance to defend themselves; they lost. Now they want the police blamed for enforcing a valid judgment.
On social media, Ugandans are not buying the sob story. “Pay your rent like the rest of us,” one widely shared comment read.
“You are a lawyer; you know better than to hide behind technicalities.” Another asked pointedly: “If every tenant starts claiming ‘option to purchase’ after defaulting, who will ever rent out property again?”
I have no quarrel with legitimate tenant rights. But when a senior member of the bar, whose firm earns millions from advising others to obey the law, refuses to obey the simplest obligation – pay what you owe – the profession’s credibility takes a hit. Muwema has every right to appeal. He does not have the right to treat a court judgment as optional while lecturing landlords on equity.The straight road is clear: pay the Shs 1.4 billion (or whatever the exact figure is after proper accounting), vacate peacefully if you must, and fight the case from outside the premises like every other litigant. Stop the corners. Stop the lectures. Stop expecting the justice system to bend because you wear a wig. The eyes of the public – and of every landlord in Kampala – are now on Muwema. Will he finally take the straight road, or will he keep driving down the legal backstreets? The answer will speak volumes about whether some lawyers believe the rules apply to everyone else but them.
Do you have a story in your community or an opinion to share with us: Email us at Submit an Article
