The Uganda Law Society (ULS) has issued a scathing condemnation of Justice Rosette Comfort Kania, accusing her of breaking the law in her decision to deny bail to Dr Kizza Besigye and Hajj Obeid Lutale on April 11, 2025.
The prominent opposition figure, Dr Besigye, and businessman Lutale are facing criminal charges, the details of which were not specified in the ULS statement.
In a strongly worded statement signed by Vice President Anthony Asiimwe, the ULS asserted that Judge Kania's denial of bail was made despite the accused fulfilling all the necessary legal requirements.
The statement highlighted that the judge based her decision on speculation that the accused might interfere with ongoing investigations due to the gravity of the charges.
Furthermore, the ULS took issue with what it described as an "unacceptably paternalistic rationale" employed by Judge Kania.
According to the statement, the judge argued that continued detention was in the best interest of Besigye and Lutale, purportedly to shield them from "falling prey to the temptation to interfere with the investigations."
The Uganda Law Society declared Judge Kania's decision to be "fundamentally flawed and impeachable," emphasising her alleged failure to cite any legal basis or precedent for deviating from established legal principles.
The ULS referenced several landmark cases, including Uganda (DPP) v Col (Rtd) Dr Kiiza Besigye, Constitutional Reference No. 20 of 2005, Attorney General v Tumushabe [2008] E.A. 26, and Attorney General v Uganda Law Society, Constitutional Appeal No. 1 of 2006, to underscore the established legal framework concerning bail applications.
The statement further elaborated on the limitations of judicial discretion, citing Aharikundira v Uganda, Supreme Court Criminal Appeal No. 27 of 2015, Sam Kuteesa v Attorney General, Constitutional Petition No. 46 of 2011, and Attorney General v Nakibuule, Constitutional Appeal No. 02 of 2016.
The ULS argued that "Judicial discretion is not absolute. It must be exercised in accordance with established legal principles."
The ULS accused Judge Kania of "judicial overreach," stating that she had "substituted judicial discretion with personal opinion, undermining the rule of law and impartiality."
The statement warned that "Judges stepping outside the law fractures the foundation upon which society stands, compromising justice and public trust."
In response to the situation, the ULS announced its intention to take action against Judge Kania.
"Whereas the ULS assures all court users that it will, in accordance with Executive Order RNB No of 2024, bring Judge Kania before the Judicial Service Commission to answer for her actions," the statement read.
The ULS also urged Besigye's legal team to "file a fresh application and approach the head of the Criminal Division immediately to rectify this harm."
Additionally, the ULS called upon the Civil Division of the High Court to expedite the hearing of the stay of execution application filed by President Isaac Ssemakadde and other urgent cases, including the ULS habeas corpus application for Advocate Eron Kiza, emphasizing that "Justice delayed is justice denied."
The strong stance taken by the Uganda Law Society highlights growing concerns about the application of judicial discretion and adherence to legal principles within the country's judicial system.
The unfolding developments in this case are likely to be closely watched by legal analysts and the public alike.
