Blair Atwebembeire.
In the age of instant information and widespread media coverage, a peculiar incident has captured the attention of many – a scandalous tale of a couple caught engaging in an intimate act on a sacred church altar. Thomas Ndabarora, a married man from Bugonya Village, Kayonza Sub-county, Kayunga District was on July 2nd caught red handed by area residents having sex with his mistress at the altar of Bugonya Church of Uganda.
As the story continues to ignite heated discussions, the focus now shifts to the local council court of Bugonya village LC1, which finds itself at the center of the storm. The burning question on everyone’s mind is whether this grassroots judicial body possesses the jurisdiction to adjudicate such a provocative and sensitive case. Beyond the titillating allure of the incident, this situation raises queries regarding scope and authority of local council courts in addressing matters that intertwine morality, community values, and the rule of law.
The local council court of Bugonya village LC1 does indeed have jurisdiction to hear certain cases, as outlined in the relevant legal provisions. It can preside over civil matters listed in the Second Schedule and those governed solely by customary law from the Third Schedule of Local Council Courts Act, 2006. Additionally, the court’s authority extends to cases arising from the violation of bye-laws and Ordinances under the Local Governments Act, as well as matters specified in the Children Act and those related to land disputes. However, it is crucial to consider how the specific incident of the couple’s actions on a church altar falls within these defined parameters and the implications of adjudicating a case with such sensitive moral and religious dimensions.
Based on the information provided to the local council court during the hearing, it is not explicitly clear whether the complaint of having sex on the church altar, would fall under disputes concerning marriage as listed in the Third Schedule. The disputes listed under (b) pertain to matters concerning marriage, marital status, separation, divorce, or the parentage of children. While the incident may have occurred within the context of a relationship having been reported by Ndabarora’s wife, it does not necessarily directly relate to marriage or its legal aspects as outlined in the Third Schedule.
The proceedings of the Bugonya village LC Court indicate the members’ strong inclination towards addressing the matter from a moral and religious standpoint. The Chairperson’s repeated emphasis on the emotional distress caused to church members and the profound concern expressed by the bishop underscore the court’s apparent focus on the broader societal impact and the violation of sacred norms. This approach suggests the court attempt to balance between legal jurisdiction and preservation of community values in adjudicating such sensitive and culturally significant cases.
Despite potential limitations in legal jurisdiction, the court’s handling of the case involving the couple on the church altar highlighted its significant role and power in fostering reconciliation and harmonious living within communities. By addressing the matter through a moral and societal lens, the court sought to address the emotional impact and cultural sensitivities involved, ultimately aiming to restore community harmony. This underscores the court’s ability to act as a platform for conflict resolution and social cohesion, even in cases where strict legal boundaries may not apply, exemplifying the broader importance of local judicial bodies in maintaining the fabric of cohesive societies.
Mr. Blair Atwebembeire is an Advocate of the High Court of Uganda. E-mail: blair.advocates@gmail.com
