The Uganda Law Society (ULS) has accused the justice and constitutional affairs minister Nobert Mao of interfering with the independence of the Judiciary.

This has been drawn from his letter to the Principal Judge Dr Flavian Zeija dated March 19, 2024.

In his letter, Mao requested Zeija to immediately review a case involving businessman Francis Ishanga against Bank of Baroda and businessman Kellen Karemera stating that it had been mishandled.

Mao stated that he had received a complaint from Mbarara City North MP Robert Mwesigwa on behalf of Ishanga contending that the latter's case had been mishandled by a judge at Mbarara High Court.

Mao noted that Ishanga had entered into a debt settlement arrangement with the bank selling part of his property comprising LRV 1072 Folio 15, Plot 1, Kitunzi Road in Mbarara city but the bank allegedly sold the same to Karemera.

In a statement issued on Tuesday (April 2, 2024) signed by the ULS president Bernard Oundo, the law society opines that Mao’s letter to Zeija undermines the independence of the Judiciary.

“The Uganda Law Society urges the Judiciary to treat with contempt such letters and communications whose sole aim is to interfere with judicial independence and continue to make judicial decisions based solely on the law and evidence presented before them as this is paramount to maintaining public trust in the legal system and upholding justice,” the letter reads in part.

The law society has also cautioned police and government agencies against implementing Mao’s directives in regard to the matter stating they are unlawful.

Oundo noted that the Judiciary should operate independently in interpreting and applying the law devoid of external influence.

The law society advised all complainants to utilise the already established legal processes for review, revision, appeal and other forms of correction of erroneous judicial decisions.  

Oundo noted that recourse to the existing judicial remedies within the legal system ensures due process of law without affecting judicial independence and the doctrine of separation of powers.

“Litigants are also reminded that a key part of judicial independence is the entitlement by the judicial officers to decide matters in good faith based on their own reasonable interpretation of the law and the assessment of the evidence without any improper influence even where the resultant decision may be considered to be erroneous by one or more litigants, their lawyers, appellate judges or the general public,” Oundo noted.

During the opening of the New Law Year 2024, Attorney General Kiryowa Kiwanuka said when other arms of Government voice their concern to the Judiciary on matters before court does not amount to interference with the independence of the Judiciary.