Judicial officers demand meeting with Principal Judge over Bukirwa’s expulsion

Kampala, Uganda | THE INDEPENDENT | The Uganda Judicial Officers Association (UJOA) has petitioned Principal Judge Flavian Zeija, demanding an urgent meeting over the expulsion of Justice Farida Bukirwa from High Court duty.

Justice Bukirwa was among the 16 justices who were appointed in acting capacity by President Yoweri Kaguta Museveni in 2022, and whose confirmation depended on their “satisfactory performance”.

After two years of service on probation, the 15 justices had their respective  appointments  confirmed as substantive but Justice Bukirwa was rejected, prompting the Principal Judge Dr Flavian Zeija to write to her demanding that she hands over office on August 15th 2024. This was in an August 8th 2024 letter.

“Therefore, since your acting period as a High Court judge expires on August 15, 2024, this is to request you to hand over your office, all judiciary property, and case files to the head of the Jinja High Court Circuit as we investigate why your instruments of appointment were never received by the judiciary,” reads Zeija’s letter.

The items that Bukirwa is supposed to take back to the judiciary include the Judicial attire comprising a wig and a gown, a car, gavel ( the court hammer ), case files that were before her. She must also surrender the body guards and a driver.

She will also lose a judge’s salary and other allowances plus benefits of a High Court Judge.

Now a letter dated August 12th 2024 by the President of UJOA Lady Justice Olive Kazaarwe Mukwaya to the Principal Judge is seeking clarification.

“This information has sent ripples of alarm amongst the current Acting Judges who shall inevitably be subject to this confirmation process, specifically, circumstances under which An Acting Judge is required to hand over office before the decision of the appointing authority is formally communicated to the Judiciary”, reads the UJOA letter.

According to UJOA, they envisage a situation where the Acting Judge’s independence shall be severely eroded as the gauntlet of an unclear confirmation process hangs over their heads.

“Our plea is that your good office makes the time to meet with the current Acting Judges in an appropriate hour before the Hon AG Judge makes her handover, to throw more light on this matter. UJOA would also like to participate in this engagement,” reads the letter.

They anticipate that this meeting will allow those affected to be certain of what is expected of them throughout this novel endeavor and allay the growing concern around the confirmation process.

Justice Bukirwa came into the spotlight last year when she issued a contested High Court order allowing three Muslims to convene the Uganda Muslim Supreme Council (UMSC) General Assembly.

She directed the applicants to elect a neutral chairperson to convene the General Assembly at a neutral venue and report the resolutions of the meeting to the High Court.

The court order drew an uproar from the UMSC leadership, who accused the judge of issuing the orders in violation of the UMSC Constitution. UMSC subsequently filed an application before the High Court in Kampala for a judicial review of the orders.

The Principal Judge halted the implementation of the resolutions from the contested General Assembly held at Ggangu Muslim Primary School and referred the matter to Justice Bukirwa for review.

However, during the hearing, UMSC accused Justice Bukirwa of bias and conflict of interest, prompting the Principal Judge to reassign the matter to another judge in the Kampala High Court.

Meanwhile the Uganda Law society has called for Justice Bukirwa’s re-instatement.

The  decision not to confirm justice Bukirwa as a substantive Judge has not  gone well with the legal minds, and the president of the Uganda Law society Bernard Oundo has expressed dismay.

He said that in absence of clear criteria and process to confirmation, Justice Bukirwa’s removal  from office should be rescinded and the Principal Judge’s letter recalled.

In the Statement from ULS, Oundo further states that a ban should be imposed on appointing Judge’s in Acting capacity.

In  December 2022, the Constitutional court ruled that it was unconstitutional to appoint Judge’s in Acting capacity. The Court then ordered the Judicial Service Commission to legalise the appointment of the then 16 justices in six months.

However the Attorney General appealed the said decision before the Supreme Court.

****

URN