Lawyer Byamukama wants two-tier appeals system for court martial cases

________________

Lawyer Jude Byamukama has called for decisions of the General Court Martial to be appealable at two levels. As opposed to the single-tier appeal system proposed in the Uganda People’s Defense Forces (Amendment) Bill, 2025.

He echoed this while appearing before two joint committees scrutinizing the bill. These are the Defense and Internal Affairs Committee chaired by Nyabushozi County MP Wilson Kajwengye (NRM) and the Legal and Parliamentary Affairs Committee led by Bukooli North MP Stephen Bakka Mugabi (NRM).

Although Byamukama opposes the trial of civilians in military courts, he believes the proposal will deliver justice to soldiers who are the court's primary subjects.

“The Supreme Court should have the usual jurisdiction to entertain a third appeal, subject to the law on third appeals, in respect of trials presided over by the Unit Court Martial and Division Court Martial. Clause 192 (15) of the Bill should be modified accordingly. This is the standard in the criminal justice system and there is no justification for denying certain accused persons a right of appeal that is available in respect of the same offence in the civilian system,” Byamukama stated.

“There is a very limited difference in jurisdiction between the Division Court Martial and the General Court Martial. Appeals from the Division Court Martial should equally proceed directly to the Court of Appeal on a First appeal and Supreme Court on a second appeal,” he added.

Similarly, Byamukama wants all matters heard by the General Court Martial in the exercise of original jurisdiction should be appealable to the Court of Appeal and Supreme Court like for all ordinary criminal trials that commence in the high court.

“The bill has provided for a right of appeal from the unit court martial or division court martial to the general court martial, and then only one right of appeal to the court of appeal to close the matter. That is insufficient, given the nature of offenses that are proposed to be covered. A person charged with murder in the civilian system gets two appeals. A person charged with murder in a military system is only going to have one appeal. That's not fair,” he said.

Fast forward, he urged the committee to treat the consultative process with seriousness, noting that he endured a torrid experience compiling the write-up, as many apathetic colleagues shunned the exercise.

“We've had a lot of debate with some of my colleagues. Many felt that the invitation to participate in this committee was just a window-dressing exercise. They have not been able to propose. I struggled to come up with my memoir very quickly, partly because I do represent people who have come from the court martial and are processed in civilian courts and are court in this dilemma,” he explained.

Byamukama said he thought he would be doing victims a disservice by not showing up.

“The timeline which the committee gave to us members of the public who might be interested to respond to that bill, is for sure quite insufficient. And, I'm afraid it might, eventually constitute a legal challenge, when this bill is passed. Article 38 of the constitution, gives the citizens the right to participate in public affairs. And in many countries, our equivalent of article 38 of the constitution has been interpreted to mean that, when parliament is enacting legislation, there should be sufficient opportunity given to citizens to make some input,” he explained.

In some respects, the constitutional court has ruled that you, our elected members, do that on our behalf. But, I think it's a bit of an error and there are several petitions in the Supreme Court over whether that is a correct interpretation of Article 38. But still, I think as a matter of practicality, it would be good to give opportunity to people to weigh in,” he summed.

Stakeholder consultations have entered their second day, having commenced on Wednesday with MPs interfacing with Attorney General Kiryowa Kiwanuka.

During the engagement yesterday, Kiryowa clarified that the 'exceptional circumstances' referenced in the Supreme Court judgment in Michael Kabaziguruka v. Attorney General (Constitutional Appeal No. 2 of 2021) implies that there is a window for trying civilians in military courts.

Later this week, the two committees are scheduled to engage with the National Unity Platform (NUP), the country’s second-largest political party, which has frequently raised concerns over the conduct of the Court Martial.