Uganda: Legal Experts Warn of Obstacles Hindering Private Prosecution in Uganda

Legal experts have highlighted major challenges affecting private prosecutions in Uganda, citing obstacles such as inconsistent legal interpretation, limited resources, and heightened risks for individuals seeking justice independently.

Speaking at a symposium on private prosecution organised by the Network of Public Interest Lawyers, various legal professionals underscored the impact of these challenges on Uganda’s justice system and called for reforms to improve accessibility for private citizens.

Prominent lawyer Male Mabirizi, the keynote speaker at the event, expressed concern over the judiciary’s support for private prosecutions, noting a lack of public accountability and fair legal access for citizens.

“Private prosecutions are essential for public interest,” he stated. “They should proceed without obstruction to uphold justice and accountability.” Mabirizi emphasised that individuals, not only public officials, must have the right to initiate cases, especially on matters of public concern.

Mabirizi argued that Uganda’s constitution grants citizens the right to pursue justice independently of state-led prosecutions, stressing the importance of legal provisions that allow for impartial scrutiny of public officials

. “Our constitution supports public interest litigation,” he said, voicing frustration over what he called the judiciary’s failure to protect this right.

“Justice must be accessible to every Ugandan, regardless of political affiliation or status,” he added, urging the judiciary to safeguard citizens’ rights to fair legal processes.

Dr. Josephine Ndagire, a lecturer at Makerere University’s Faculty of Law, also highlighted the hurdles facing private prosecutions, including perceptions of malicious intent, financial constraints, and limited access to investigative resources

“If you bring a private prosecution, you risk facing accusations of malicious prosecution,” she noted, emphasising that a strong basis must be established to avoid such claims.

Ndagire referenced the Goldframe Bova case, which set important standards for proving malicious prosecution, underscoring the need for substantial evidence before filing charges.

She also stressed the financial burdens of private prosecution, observing, “Legal proceedings are costly, particularly for criminal cases.

While some NGOs offer support, individual citizens often struggle to afford the expenses, making justice inaccessible for many.”

Ndagire further discussed the challenges of accessing information critical for building cases, particularly those involving public officials.

“Prosecutors face barriers to accessing state-held information despite constitutional rights to information,” she noted, referencing Article 41 of the Ugandan Constitution.

Increasing bureaucracy now often requires multiple approvals, which complicates and delays the pursuit of justice.

“What was once a straightforward process now demands formal authorisations,” she explained.

Constitutional lawyer George Musisi added his voice to the discussion, focusing on broader prosecutorial issues in Uganda.

He emphasized the risks of prosecutorial abuse by the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (ODPP), questioning the office’s decision-making processes.

“The ODPP’s biggest fear is potential abuse, and in some cases, that fear is justified,” Musisi stated, suggesting that many cases brought forward may not be of public interest and would not normally be pursued.

Musisi further criticized the inconsistent interpretations of legal statutes among judicial stakeholders, which he argued undermines public confidence in the justice system.

“Key stakeholders interpret the law differently, leading to varying approaches,” he said. “This difference in interpretation is one of the primary challenges our judicial system faces.”

Sign up for free AllAfrica Newsletters

Get the latest in African news delivered straight to your inbox

Success!

Almost finished…

We need to confirm your email address.

To complete the process, please follow the instructions in the email we just sent you.

Error!

There was a problem processing your submission. Please try again later.

According to Musisi, this discrepancy contributes to a “negative perception” of the judicial system and erodes trust.

He also raised concerns about the “OTP takeover” system, where cases are either taken over or discontinued by the ODPP.

“The regulator may take over a case only to discontinue it,” he explained, arguing that the oversight provided by the ODPP is inadequate, as many cases are not fully prosecuted.

Musisi concluded by emphasizing the resource and logistical challenges faced by prosecutors. “Imagine if a case had to be taken over and prosecuted successfully; there would be issues with resources, witness coordination, and investigative demands,” he said.

He cited attempts to mobilize funds, adding, “Contributions and resources are not guaranteed, and this lack of support hinders case progression.”

ADVERTISEMENT