The friction between Uganda Law Society (ULS) President Isaac Ssemakadde and High Court judge Musa Ssekaana has escalated into one of the most high-profile legal battles in Uganda’s recent history.
On Friday, Ssekaana sentenced Ssemakadde to a two-year prison sentence for contempt of court, deepening the conflict and polarising the legal fraternity.
Ssemakadde, who was not present in court, shot back at X, saying Ssekaana’s actions were null and void. He vowed not to honour the sentence.
Yet what began as a dispute over judicial conduct has evolved into a deeply personal and institutional battle, testing the limits of legal power and judicial accountability.
For the neutrals, it has served up some thrills and has all the makings of a first-rate legal drama TV show, in case a thoughtful movie producer wants to pursue it further.
Genesis
The first public confrontation between Ssemakadde and Ssekaana dates back to February 2022, when Ssemakadde launched a scathing critique of Ssekaana’s handling of legal matters, particularly his sentencing of city lawyer Male Mabirizi to 18 months in prison for contempt of court.
Ssemakadde accused Ssekaana of acting as though he embodied the justice system itself rather than being a mere custodian of it.
In response to his comments, Ssemakadde was summoned by the Directorate of Criminal Investigations (CID) over allegations of offensive communication against the judge. However, he remained defiant, insisting that judicial officers must be open to criticism when they fail to uphold the principles of justice.
This was the first significant sign that Ssemakadde would not back down from challenging what he viewed as judicial excesses.
The feud escalated further in March 2022 when a city lawyer, Robert Rutaro, dragged Ssemakadde to court, accusing him of making defamatory statements against Ssekaana. The lawsuit stemmed from Ssemakadde’s reaction on Twitter to Ssekaana’s decision against Mabirizi.
His remarks, which included insinuations about the judge’s intelligence and masculinity, sparked outrage among legal practitioners who saw them as an attack on judicial dignity.
Rutaro argued that Ssemakadde’s statements could mislead young lawyers into thinking it was acceptable to verbally assault judicial officers. He contended that such behavior undermined the rule of law and the independence of the judiciary. Despite the lawsuit, Ssemakadde remained unrepentant, portraying himself as a fearless defender of legal integrity and free speech.
In December 2024, a couple of months after he had been elected ULS president, the animosity between the two figures reached unprecedented levels.
In a shocking move, Ssemakadde issued an executive order (RnB No.3 of 2024) directing the legal fraternity to boycott Justice Ssekaana over allegations of judicial misconduct.
The order, citing 18 instances of abuse of power, bias, intimidation, and failure to recuse himself from conflicted cases, represented a direct challenge to Ssekaana’s credibility.
Furthermore, Ssemakadde went a step further by revoking the ULS award of ‘Excellence from the Bench,’ which had been conferred upon Ssekaana in 2021. He ordered the judge to return the award and remove any reference to it from his credentials.
The directive, issued under Section 10 of the ULS, also warned ULS members of disciplinary action should they fail to comply with the boycott.
Ssekaana has shot back with a stinging ruling that raises crucial questions about judicial accountability, legal ethics, and the balance of power within Uganda’s justice system.
On the one hand, many lawyers argue that Ssekaana was deeply conflicted and should never have heard the case in the first place because he was the subject of Ssemakadde’s tirades.
On the other, some argue that Ssemakadde’s radical and unorthodox approach to legal issues needed to be stopped.
They say by leveraging his position as ULS President to call for a boycott of Ssekaana; he had effectively politicized a matter that should have been resolved through formal judicial channels.
What Next?
The coming days will be crucial in determining the outcome of this standoff. Ssemakadde faces the prospect of two years in jail, essentially meaning that he will serve out the remainder of his term as ULS president behind bars.
Should Ssemakadde appeal against the sentence successfully, it will leave an egg on Ssekaana’s face. His reputation as a no-nonsense judge who takes matters personally is already engraved in stone.
For the broader public, the hope is that this conflict between two legal titans leads to meaningful judicial reforms.