Retired senior judges have raised the alarm over a rising trend of contradictory court decisions, warning that it is undermining the consistency of Ugandan jurisprudence and creating opportunities for abuse within the legal system.
The judges say this growing confusion erodes the clear guidance that precedents are meant to provide to lower courts, legal practitioners, and law students.
Their warning came during a session on judgment writing held as part of the Eastern Uganda judicial officers’ training in Mbale.
Former Principal Judge Yorokamu Bamwine explained that appellate court rulings are intended to establish consistent legal principles that lower courts can reliably follow.
However, he said the increasing number of judges and conflicting judgments have weakened this clarity.
“We used to speak of trite law—settled legal principles—but the law is no longer trite. What is happening?” Bamwine lamented.
“Any litigant can now bring forward a claim—people like Mabirizi—we are giving them a field day.”
Bamwine noted that the number of High Court judges has grown from just six when he joined to about 100 today, a change that naturally leads to varied opinions. “And that is where the problem lies,” he said.
Justice David Wangutusi, a retired High Court judge, emphasized the critical role of precedent in maintaining an orderly and predictable justice system.
“Magistrates follow decisions of chief magistrates, chief magistrates follow High Court judgments, and the High Court follows the Court of Appeal,” he said.
Wangutusi partly attributed the inconsistencies to a lack of collegial engagement among judicial officers.
He encouraged judges and magistrates to maintain professional networks and openly share perspectives before delivering judgments, noting that such interaction could help align interpretations of the law.
Adding further guidance, former Deputy Chief Justice Richard Butera, who facilitated part of the training, said judicial officers should navigate conflicting precedents by clearly explaining why one is preferred over another in the specific context of each case.
Precedent, also known as case law, refers to the practice of using past judicial decisions as authoritative guides for resolving future cases.
It is a cornerstone of common law systems, ensuring that similar cases are treated alike and that the law evolves coherently over time.
The concerns raised by the retired judges underscore an urgent need to reinforce the principle of precedent within Uganda’s judiciary to restore certainty and uphold the integrity of jurisprudence.
