ULS President Ssemakadde Sentenced To Two Years In Prison Over Contempt Of Court

By Spy Uganda

Justice Musa Ssekaana has sentenced Uganda Law Society President Isaac Ssemakadde to imprisonment for two years, for contempt of court.

Ssemakadde’s conviction follows a petition filed by Hashim Mugisha, who accused him of launching personal attacks against Justice Ssekaana and attempting to discredit the judiciary. The outspoken lawyer made a series of posts on X (formerly Twitter), including allegations of an “unholy alliance” between the judge, the Attorney General, and Uganda Law Society members. One of his most controversial remarks even likened the judge to a “small penis” and falsely claimed sexual harassment.

In response, the court ruled that such comments were not just inappropriate but a direct attempt to erode public trust in the judiciary. Justice Ssekaana emphasized that judicial officers must be shielded from undue influence, particularly when cases are pending before them.

“The protection of courts from attacks of this kind is vital,” the judge noted, warning that social media has become a tool for individuals to intimidate judicial officers and manipulate legal proceedings.

Ssemakadde’s supporters argue that his sentencing raises important questions about the limits of free speech in Uganda’s legal system. While the court acknowledged that criticism of judicial officers is permissible, it distinguished between constructive criticism and defamatory attacks meant to intimidate or discredit judges.

“The right to free speech is fundamental, but it must not be exercised in a way that undermines public order, morality, or the authority of the State,” Justice Ssekaana stated in his ruling.

It is worth noting that speaking at the New Law Year ceremony last week, Chief Justice Alfonse Owiny-Dollo issued a stern warning to those who attack judicial officers.

“Criticism is acceptable, but abuse will not be tolerated,” the Chief Justice said. “People think they have greatness in attacking instead of providing reasoned arguments. If the law doesn’t favour you, accept it. Our duty is to uphold constitutionalism and justice.”

Read Full Ruling Below 

THE REPUBLIC OF UGANDA
IN THE HIGH COURT OF UGANDA AT KAMPALA
(CIVIL DIVISION)

MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION NO. 0059 OF 2025
(Arising out of Miscellaneous Application No. 1243 of 2024)
(Arising from Miscellaneous Cause No. 263 of 2024)

MUGISHA HASHIM MUGISHA::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::APPLICANT
VERSUS
ISAAC KIMEZZE SSEMAKADDE::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::RESPONDENT

BEFORE: HON. JUSTICE SSEKAANA MUSA

RULING

The applicant brought this application under section 37 of the Judicature Act, section 64 (e) and 98 of the Civil Procedure Act and Order 52 rules 1, 2 and 3 of the Civil Procedure Act seeking the following orders:

1. A declaration that the respondent acted and continues to act in contempt of court by publishing derogatory remarks and sentiments on his social media handles X (formerly Twitter) against the person of the trial Judge, Honourable Justice Musa Ssekaana and the court.
2. An order directing the respondent to immediately stop all the publications and release of derogatory remarks against Honourable Musa Ssekaana and the court.
3. An order that the respondent be arrested and detained in civil prison for contempt.
4. An order directing the respondent to pay UGX 300,000,000/= as fines to court for wanton and/or illegal behavior/actions.
5. Further and other sanctions as this court may deem fit be placed upon the respondent until he purges the contempt.

An affront to the impartiality of the judge and to the judiciary as an institution. Such serious and deliberate attacks clearly undermine the dignity and authority of this court which cannot, and must not, be condoned.

What remedies are available?

However, as stated previously, contempt proceedings are between the Court and the alleged contemnor and therefore this application is not a suit between the applicant and the respondent. As such, the court is not bound by the orders sought by the applicant, but this court has found the respondent acted in contempt of court.

In determining the appropriate sanction, the Court should consider that the objective of the contempt of court proceedings is to protect the public interest or confidence in the due administration of justice. This is done by punishing acts or statements which tend to abuse or make a mockery of administration of justice, or which tend to lower the authority of individual Judicial officers.

The repeated nature of the attacks by a person knowledgeable in legal matters and duly elected as president of Uganda Law Society invites this court to send a strong warning and caution against future contemnors, ‘foot soldiers’, and respondents in the main cause to desist from such conduct in the future.

The respondent should be arrested and imprisoned for a period of two (2) years. The costs shall be in the cause.

I so Order

SSEKAANA MUSA
JUDGE
14TH FEBRUARY 2025