"Insufficient" and potentially unconstitutional – that's how the Leader of Opposition, Joel Ssenyonyi, described Justice Minister Nobert Mao's update to Parliament today on the transfer of cases from the General Court Martial to civilian courts.
MPs across the political divide voiced their "dissatisfaction" with the glacial pace, leaving hundreds in legal limbo.
Minister Mao revealed that of the 423 files submitted by the Uganda Prisons Service following a directive to move cases to civilian jurisdiction, a mere "45 files are currently before the Office of the Directorate of Public Prosecutions."
This stark revelation triggered a fiery response from Ssenyonyi, who argued that the Minister's statement "violates Article 92 of the Constitution (which prohibits legislation to countermand the judgment of Court), and is insufficient."
Mao explained, "Pursuant to the advice, the Uganda Prison Authority did submit a list of 423 cases as advised by the Attorney General vide a letter dated 6th February 2025 of prisoners remanded by the courts martial.
"Further, we are in receipt of information that the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions has received 45 cases from the Ministry of Defence and Veteran Affairs."
He assured the House that the Ministry of Defence and Veteran Affairs is "still preparing to submit other criminal cases to the ODPP as advised and we will shall at the earliest update this August House when this is done."
However, Ssenyonyi questioned the government's motives, asking, "whether government is intentionally delaying the matters to first track the UPDF amendment bill."
In a bid to explain the delays, Minister Mao pointed to the "substantiality of some cases preferred indicating that some exhibits were perishable."
This explanation did little to appease the opposition.
"Those in detention are suspects awaiting trial," Ssenyonyi retorted, defending his criticism. He insisted that while investigations should be thorough, they should not be "deliberately slow."
Mao further admitted to the challenge faced by the DPP in sanctioning files for investigations they were not involved in from the outset.
The issue of perishable exhibits drew further concern from the Leader of the Opposition, who questioned how such cases would be handled and urged the government to "drop what he termed flimsy charges."
While Minister Mao also presented on the amendment to the UPDF Act and the Supreme Court decision on military courts martial, the overwhelming focus of the parliamentary session remained on the agonizingly slow progress of the case transfers.
The sentiment within the House was clear: for hundreds of individuals, "court martial prisoners' justice is yet to come."