By Insight Post Uganda
Kampala, Uganda
The Judicature (Amendment) Bill for the year 2023 has been approved, with the notable rejection of the government’s proposition to augment the number of Supreme Court justices from 11 to 21.
Additionally, the proposed amendment to elevate the justices of the Court of Appeal from 15 to 56, with a provision for only 35 judges, was also turned down by the House.
The government had put forward this proposal, citing the need to address the backlog of cases in both courts, emphasizing that an increased judicial capacity would lead to improved service delivery at these levels.
However, parliamentary deliberations ultimately resulted in the rejection of these particular amendments to the bill.
The decision made by Parliament aligns with the findings of the Committee on Legal and Parliamentary Affairs, which contended that an increase in the number of judges might not be the definitive solution for ensuring effective justice delivery.
Robina Rwakoojo, the Committee Chairperson, asserted that the committee’s analysis revealed that the backlog of cases is not solely attributed to a shortage of Supreme Court justices.
Instead, factors such as inefficiency, poor case management, and the expansive jurisdiction of the Supreme Court, allowing every matter to be referred to it, contribute to the backlog.
The chairperson further noted that the committee deemed the legal and financial implications of the proposed amendment insufficiently conceptualized by the drafters of the Bill.
“The Committee is concerned that increasing the number of justices of the Supreme Court will increase government expenditure,” she said, adding that whereas the government issued a certificate of financial implications, the certificate does not take into account the additional costs required to make the additional justices effective in executing their mandates.
According to Rwakoojo, they are aware that a Justice of the Supreme Court is entitled to certain facilities, including bodyguards, research officers, house helps, and other individuals who facilitate the justices in delivering on their mandate.
“These individuals are remunerated from the consolidated fund, and the costs associated with their employment were not considered, yet they will burden the taxpayer,” she explained.
The committee, in its examination of alternative approaches to address court backlog, put forth recommendations to the government beyond a mere increase in the number of judges.
One suggestion involved invoking Article 41 of the Constitution, empowering the Chief Justice to temporarily appoint justices to tackle the backlog in the Supreme Court.
The committee further viewed this as a more cost-effective and efficient approach since the acting justices are not entitled to retirement benefits, and once the case backlog is cleared, their appointments can be revoked.
“This alternative method offers a pragmatic solution without imposing a long-term financial burden on the taxpayer,” she noted.
Rwakoojo noted that the Judicial Service Commission shares a similar perspective, highlighting that the President has previously made temporary appointments of judicial officers to address specific needs within the judiciary.
She suggested a reconsideration of the Supreme Court’s jurisdiction, proposing a focus solely on matters of law. This adjustment aims to narrow down the range of cases that can be filed at the Supreme Court, potentially alleviating the current burden.
The committee further acknowledged that presently, all matters, even those typically within the purview of lower courts, can be appealed to the Supreme Court.
In pursuit of effective backlog management, the committee further recommended an expansion of the mandate of magistrate’s courts to help alleviate the workload of higher courts.
This strategic move aims to distribute and address cases at an appropriate level, contributing to a more efficient and streamlined judicial process.
MPs React
Wilfred Niwagaba, the MP for Ndorwa County East, raised concerns about the government’s pursuit of additional judges.
He pointed out a historical inconsistency, noting that since 2008, the government has failed to fulfil the prescribed appointments of 11 judges for the Supreme Court and 15 judges for the Court of Appeal, as outlined in the Judicature Act.
“We did pass the Judicature Amendment Act in 2008 and increased the number of justices of the Supreme Court to 11, but up to now there are nine judges; why can’t you first appoint the 11?” Niwagaba said.
The legislator further questioned the rationale behind seeking to appoint 35 judges when the current law allows for 15 judges in the Court of Appeal, yet only 12 have been appointed.
Niwagaba further questioned the feasibility of appointing 35 judges when the government has faced challenges in appointing the previously designated 15.
In response, the Minister of Justice and Constitutional Affairs, Nobert Mao, reiterated that the delay in these appointments was attributed to the operations of the Judicial Service Commission.
Mao assured that the commission is now well-constituted and functional, suggesting that this improvement would facilitate the overdue appointments. He highlighted the government’s dedication to enhancing access to justice and addressing practical concerns.
Mao acknowledged the pressing issue of individuals awaiting the hearing of their appeal cases and highlighted the challenges posed by the health of Court of Appeal judges, emphasising the need to alleviate the backlog that has been constraining their effectiveness.
END
English 