Law Society can do more for civil society, political activists

By Isaac K. Ssemakadde

The three-page press statement issued by the Uganda Law Society president Ms Ruth Sebatindira on 12 October in the wake of the unspeakable events of 10 October at Kyoja on the Masaka-Mbarara highway and Kanyaryeru in Kiruhura district of Western Uganda was, in my view, too little too late.

The Law Society has waited so long to shine the spotlight on police brutality, and yet when the occasion arose the organization focused more on being polite and politically correct instead of offering the public a clear and bold plan of action on how to reform the police and widen space for citizens to exercise their constitutionally guaranteed rights.

I am therefore constrained to criticize the Law Society for five major flaws in this hastily prepared statement titled “Respect for Human Dignity and Protection from Inhuman Treatment”.

First, the 786-word statement contains a tacit denial of the dreadful operating environment for activists in Uganda. It deceptively portrays the events of 10 October as isolated incidents in a country with a respected and law abiding police force which respects human dignity and protects activists from inhuman treatment.

This is contrary to the annual reports of the Uganda Human Rights Commission (UHRC). Since the return of multiparty politics in 2005, UHRC has constantly reported the Uganda Police Force (UPF) as one of the main violators of human rights in Uganda especially concerning torture, cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.

Secondly, the Law Society statement paints the picture of a sane and sober NRM government that can urgently turn things around by respecting basic rights of activists and prosecuting those who violate them, especially during the election season. However given what we have seen since 2005, this is pure bunkum.
 

Thirdly, the police force is dishonestly portrayed as a credible institution capable of investigating and reforming itself, and we are also told that the main reasons for the frightening levels of police brutality are lack of adequate training “in the area of human rights” (for which the solution lies in a rapid review of the curriculum at the police academy), and occasional lapses of “integrity, sound judgment and professionalism” among a few police officers (for which the solution lies in swift internal investigations and disciplinary action).

But these accounts are obviously misleading. All experts working on police reform agree that the main reason why police officers continue to be the top violators of human rights in Uganda is because they can get away with it, even where their shenanigans are instantly broadcast on social media.

Against this background, the Law Society’s recommendations to Government, UPF and political activists are comical because they ignore the overwhelming barriers to police accountability, embedded within the administrative and criminal systems, which make it possible for officers who commit human rights violations to escape due punishment and often to repeat their offences.

To circumvent official unwillingness to deal seriously with police officers who commit abuses and other barriers to accountability, I expected the Law Society to use this opportunity to constitute a committee of inquiry into cases of police misconduct since 2005 and to advocate for legislation establishing a specialized, independent police complaints authority like the new Kenya Independent Policing Oversight Authority but, unfortunately, this did not happen.

Fourthly, activists have long cried out for Law Society-backed Bail and Bond Policy Guidelines that would effectively eradicate the bribe culture at police cells and magistrates’ courts, but it seems Sebatindira & Co do not care about the plight of the wananchi.

Finally, the Constitutional Court has agreed with us that police officers must be held personally accountable in civil proceedings for human rights violations. However, many Ugandans will not be able to utilize this accountability procedure if the Law Society continues to shy away, as it did on 12 October, from giving the assurance of immediate, free and quality legal aid to vulnerable activists without discrimination on the ground of sex, sexual orientation, tribe, religion, social or economic standing, political opinion, disability or any other description.

The writer is the CEO Legal Brains Trust, a Kampala-based human rights watchdog