News
Ssemakadde celebrates court verdict striking down 'insulting modesty of woman' charge
The justices said the amendment must also define what amounts to insulting the modesty of a person, an element they found lacking in the current law
Uganda Law Society (ULS) president Isaac Ssemakadde. (File)
By: Farooq Kasule, Journalist @New Vision
__________________
Self-exiled Uganda Law Society (ULS) president Isaac Ssemakadde has welcomed a Constitutional Court judgment striking down the offence of insulting the modesty of a woman.
Ssemakadde had been battling the charge of insulting the modesty of a woman in court, and it is partly the reason he went into exile after the court issued a warrant of arrest against him.
“I have been vindicated by the Constitutional Court for the second time this year,” Ssemakadde said in a statement today (November 4) in reaction to the judgment.
Private prosecutors, including Tony Tumukunde and Joshua Byamazima, accused Ssemakadde of insulting the modesty of Principal Judge Jane Frances Abodo, then Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP), over remarks he allegedly made after her appointment to replace Supreme Court justice Mike Chibita as DPP.
Five justices of the court, led by Cheborion Barishaki, struck down the offence, ruling that the law discriminates against men and violates the Constitution. Other justices are; Oscar Kihika, Margaret Tibulya, Cornelia Sabiiti Kakooza, and Musa Ssekaana.
In a unanimous decision, they found that section 115 of the Penal Code Act breaches Article 21(3), which prohibits discrimination on grounds including sex.
They have directed the Attorney General to table a Bill in Parliament amending the section so that it protects people of both genders.
The justices said the amendment must also define what amounts to insulting the modesty of a person, an element they found lacking in the current law. The judgment followed a petition by lawyer Steven Kalali.
Five justices of the court, led by Cheborion Barishaki, struck down the offence, ruling that the law discriminates against men and violates the Constitution. Other justices are; Oscar Kihika, Margaret Tibulya, Cornelia Sabiiti Kakooza, and Musa Ssekaana.
In a unanimous decision, they found that section 115 of the Penal Code Act breaches Article 21(3), which prohibits discrimination on grounds including sex.
They have directed the Attorney General to table a Bill in Parliament amending the section so that it protects people of both genders.
The justices said the amendment must also define what amounts to insulting the modesty of a person, an element they found lacking in the current law. The judgment followed a petition by lawyer Steven Kalali.
Private prosecutions also affected
In a separate ruling, the same justices nullified section 42 of the Magistrates Courts Act, which provided for private prosecutions.
The justices found that the provision allowed magistrates to investigate complaints, draw up charge sheets and then preside over the same cases, blurred the separation of judicial functions and raised fair trial concerns.
They have equally directed the Attorney General to propose amendments under which private prosecution charges would be drawn up by a complainant, lawyers or the DPP rather than the trial magistrates as it is done under the current law.
The judgement followed a petition filed by lawyers; Michael Aboneka and Martins Kirya.
In a separate ruling, the same justices nullified section 42 of the Magistrates Courts Act, which provided for private prosecutions.
The justices found that the provision allowed magistrates to investigate complaints, draw up charge sheets and then preside over the same cases, blurred the separation of judicial functions and raised fair trial concerns.
They have equally directed the Attorney General to propose amendments under which private prosecution charges would be drawn up by a complainant, lawyers or the DPP rather than the trial magistrates as it is done under the current law.
The judgement followed a petition filed by lawyers; Michael Aboneka and Martins Kirya.