Resolve Choudry case to save the Judiciary
May 18, 2010
LAWYERS have warned that the continued stay of War Crimes Court judge Anup Singh Choudry in office is denting the image of the Judiciary.
LAWYERS have warned that the continued stay of War Crimes Court judge Anup Singh Choudry in office is denting the image of the Judiciary.
The lawyers, under the Uganda Law Society (ULS), say the credibility of the Judiciary risks a vote of no confidence over a judge whose past has come under public scrutiny. According to the ULS, Choudry’s name was struck off the solicitors’ list in the UK in 2000 for alleged fraudulent dealings.
The British authorities closed his East London law firm after the Office for the Supervision of Solicitors disqualified him over reports that he falsely claimed a million pounds as costs for a client he represented.
Prof Fred Ssempebwa of the Judicial Service Commission (JSC) says that they have proof from London where Choudry was practising before he came to Uganda that there is a prima-facie case against the judge. The JSC has also recommended to the President to form a tribunal to look into Choudry’s case but has received no response.
The lawyers want the Principal Judge, James Ogoola, to compel Choudry to surrender 11 court case files until the queries relating to his conduct have been resolved. The head of the Commercial Court, Justice Stella Arach-Amoko, has written to Justice Ogoola about the matter but Ogoola has not replied. That means the cases Choudry is handling cannot go on! Justice delayed means justice denied.
It is particularly disturbing that Justice Choudry is invoking the President’s name. He says it is only the President who appointed him who can remove him.
The President, as head of state, is the fountain of honour in the country and his name must not be dragged in the mire.
The Choudry impasse is most unfortunate because it casts the image of the Judiciary in bad light. It would be prudent for the President to institute the tribunal as requested or Choudry to gracefully bow out to save the Judiciary from the embarrassment.
The lawyers, under the Uganda Law Society (ULS), say the credibility of the Judiciary risks a vote of no confidence over a judge whose past has come under public scrutiny. According to the ULS, Choudry’s name was struck off the solicitors’ list in the UK in 2000 for alleged fraudulent dealings.
The British authorities closed his East London law firm after the Office for the Supervision of Solicitors disqualified him over reports that he falsely claimed a million pounds as costs for a client he represented.
Prof Fred Ssempebwa of the Judicial Service Commission (JSC) says that they have proof from London where Choudry was practising before he came to Uganda that there is a prima-facie case against the judge. The JSC has also recommended to the President to form a tribunal to look into Choudry’s case but has received no response.
The lawyers want the Principal Judge, James Ogoola, to compel Choudry to surrender 11 court case files until the queries relating to his conduct have been resolved. The head of the Commercial Court, Justice Stella Arach-Amoko, has written to Justice Ogoola about the matter but Ogoola has not replied. That means the cases Choudry is handling cannot go on! Justice delayed means justice denied.
It is particularly disturbing that Justice Choudry is invoking the President’s name. He says it is only the President who appointed him who can remove him.
The President, as head of state, is the fountain of honour in the country and his name must not be dragged in the mire.
The Choudry impasse is most unfortunate because it casts the image of the Judiciary in bad light. It would be prudent for the President to institute the tribunal as requested or Choudry to gracefully bow out to save the Judiciary from the embarrassment.