The High Court in Kampala has set June 29, 2026, as the date on which it will deliver its ruling on an application filed by former Insurance Regulatory Authority (IRA) Chief Executive Officer Ibrahim Lubega Kaddunabbi. He is seeking temporary orders to stop the implementation of a board decision that declined to support his bid for a second term in office.
The matter was heard on Monday before the head of the Civil Division, Lady Justice Joyce Kavuma, who fixed the ruling date after listening to arguments from both Lubega and the respondents, the IRA and its former Board Chairperson, Dr. Isaac Nabeta Nkote.
Lubega’s current five-year contract ended on May 31, 2026. He has since challenged a decision made on February 16, 2026, in which the IRA Board resolved not to recommend him to the Minister of Finance, Planning and Economic Development for contract renewal as CEO.
In his court filings, Lubega argues that he qualifies for another term under the Insurance Act and the Authority’s Human Resource Manual. He maintains that his performance record was strong throughout his tenure and that he therefore had a reasonable expectation of being considered for reappointment.
He also states that he formally notified the board in May 2025 of his intention to seek renewal and later submitted relevant performance reports. However, he alleges that the board proceeded to make its decision without giving him an opportunity to defend his application.
Lubega further claims that after the non-recommendation decision, the board went ahead to place him on compulsory annual leave beginning in May 2026 as part of his exit process. He is now seeking interim orders to prevent the authority and its board from enforcing the decision or compelling him to proceed on leave while his main judicial review case is still pending.
The substantive application seeks remedies including certiorari, prohibition, declarations, and injunctions against the respondents. Lubega argues that without court intervention, the board’s actions may be implemented before the case is fully heard, potentially rendering the matter meaningless and causing him irreversible harm.
However, the IRA and Dr. Nabeta oppose the application, describing it as legally and factually unfounded. Through Dentons Advocates, they argue that the earlier interim orders did not extend Lubega’s contract, renew his tenure, or suspend the legal effect of its expiry.
They maintain that his contract, which ran from June 1, 2021 to May 31, 2026, ended automatically upon expiry of time.
The respondents further state that after the board’s decision, the Minister of Finance directed the Auditor General to investigate issues related to Lubega’s conduct and suitability for reappointment. They add that Lubega participated in the process and submitted responses before the board revisited the matter on May 25, 2026.
They also informed court that following the end of Lubega’s contract, Dr. Sande Protazio was appointed Acting CEO and assumed office on June 1, 2026.
According to the respondents, the application has been overtaken by events since the contract has expired, investigations have concluded, and leadership at the authority has already transitioned.
They further argue that granting the orders would affect individuals who are not parties to the case, including the acting CEO and officials from the Ministry of Finance. They also dismiss allegations of contempt raised by Lubega, noting that no formal contempt proceedings have been filed before court.
IRA and Dr. Nabeta warn that the orders being sought would disrupt the current administrative arrangement, create leadership uncertainty at the regulator, and potentially lead to competing claims over the CEO position. They have therefore asked court to dismiss the application with costs.
Their lawyer, John Musiime, previously told court that the dispute carries significant implications for governance at the IRA, which oversees Uganda’s insurance sector.
The ruling scheduled for June 29 will determine whether interim protection is granted while the main judicial review case challenging the board’s decision proceeds.
English 