Kampala, Uganda.
The Judicial Service Commission (JSC) has been in the spotlight recently due to its recommendation to President Museveni to appoint judges in acting capacity for two years, a decision that has raised constitutional concerns. Despite the Constitutional Court ruling this move as unconstitutional, the JSC stands by its decision, citing the authority granted to them under Article 147 1(a). The controversy centers around the implications of these acting appointments and their potential impact on the judiciary’s independence and tenure.
In the past year, the JSC advised President Museveni to appoint 27 judges, along with several registrars and magistrates, in acting capacity. However, this decision faced a legal challenge, with the Constitutional Court deeming the initial appointment of 16 acting judges as unconstitutional. While the court ordered the regularization of these appointments within six months, the Supreme Court has temporarily stayed this order.
Justice Benjamin Kabiito, the chairperson of the JSC, has defended the decision, pointing to Article 147 1(a) as the legal basis for advising the President on these appointments. According to Justice Kabiito, the two-year acting period serves as an assessment phase for the appointees. This period allows the JSC to evaluate their performance based on set Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) and determine their suitability for permanent appointment. Those who meet the required standards will be confirmed, while others will return to their previous roles.
The Uganda Law Society (ULS) has expressed reservations about appointing judges in acting capacity, citing the importance of judicial independence and security of tenure. The ULS argues that appointing judges in this manner may compromise their independence, as their confirmation is uncertain. They stress the need for judges to have full security of tenure to ensure they can make decisions independently and impartially.
