Humanist

Well, on this Valentines Day, 14^th February 2025, the so-called ‘day of love’, the Radical New Bar is celebrating its love of the Law and the rule of law, by flexing legal muscle.

One among them, Counsel Yasin Sentumbwe Munagomba, has successfully filed Petion 5 of 2025 at the Constitutional Court against two members of the Bench, together with the Legal Representative of Government as the Respondents.

The Petitioner, Counsel Munagomba, according to his X profile (@munagomba), is also the Chief Executive Officer of Gain Confidence Africa, and he identifies as “an upcoming legal rebel and trade unionist.”

Hon. Chief Justice Alfonse Chigamoy Owiny-Dollo, the first respondent, is the Chief Justice of Uganda. Hon. Justice Musa Ssekaana, the second respondent, was recently appointed Justice of the Court of Appeal. And the third respondent, the Attorney General, is the Legal Representative of Government.

The Petitioner alleges that the Respondents on multiple occasions and in exercise of the duties of their respective offices and positions have conducted themselves in a manner in contravention of the Law.

Furthermore, the Petitioner alleges that the Respondents have made orders that contravene multiple provisions of the Law.

Including, in relation to the following Articles of the Constitution that the Petitioner cites and references in his petition, and which he alleges the utterances, actions and orders the Respondents, specifically contravened:

• Supremacy of Constitution (Article 2)
• Fundamental rights (Articles 20 (1) & 20 (2))
• Right to equality and freedom from discrimination (Articles 21(1) & 21 (2))
• Right to fair hearing (Articles 28 (1) & 44(c))
• Right to freedom of speech and expression (Article 29 (1) (a))
• Right to freedom of thought and of association (Article 29 (1) (b) & (e))
• Civic rights (Article 38(2))
• Right to just and fair treatment in administrative decisions (Article 42)
• Limitation on rights (Article 43 (1))
• Exercise of judicial power and administration of justice (Article 126 (1) & (2))
• Independence of the Judiciary (Article 128 (1) & (2))
• Non-interference in judicial processes (Article 128 (2))
• Administrative functions of the Chief Justice (Article 133 (1Xb))

The Petitioner prays that the Constitutional Court finds the Respondents guilty of said alleged conduct in contravention of the Law and nullify the fruits of said alleged conduct – judicial or administrative instruments and orders.

Furthermore, the Petitioner prays that the Constitutional Court orders “a permanent injunction restraining the respondents, their agents, and/or servants from continuing a campaign weaponizing the government through judicial harassment, bias and reprisals against the Uganda Law Society and its current President lsaac K. Ssemakadde,” among others.

Read “Duke of Sussex Prince Harry touching people around the world with “we are invictus spirit” for insights into the genesis of the recent spat between the Bar and the Bench.