Human Rights
Justice Mugenyi Affirms Military Trials for Civilians as Unconstitutional

In a landmark ruling delivered today, Justice Monica Mugenyi of the Supreme Court upheld the unconstitutionality of the section 117(1)(h) of the Uganda People’s Defence Forces (UPDF) Act, which previously allowed military courts to try civilians.
The decision comes after an appeal filed by the Attorney General in 2022 following a similar ruling by the Constitutional Court in 2022.
Justice Mugenyi confirmed that the General Court Martial (GCM) is not an independent or impartial court as required by Uganda’s Constitution, which mandates the right to a fair trial under Article 28(1).
She emphasized that the court’s structure and the process for appointing its judges were incompatible with constitutional standards, stating, “The General Court Martial is not an independent and impartial court and is inconsistent with the Constitution.”
The judgment was also critical of the vague provisions in the UPDF Act. Specifically, Justice Mugenyi ruled that section 117(1)(h) of the Act, which allows civilians who assist military officers in committing crimes to be tried in a military court, is void for its lack of clarity.
“Service offenses are not at cross purposes with the objectives of the UPDF or the legislative mandate of Parliament, and they are not inconsistent with the Constitution,” she noted.
In a bid to ensure the impartiality of the court, Justice Mugenyi proposed that members of the General Court Martial be appointed in consultation with the Judicial Service Commission, guaranteeing that judges possess the necessary legal expertise and are not unduly influenced by military interests.
This recommendation was in line with her belief that the court must operate with the highest levels of independence and fairness, similar to the composition of industrial courts, which include civilian judges.
Justice Mugenyi’s ruling also modifies the orders in the lead judgment of the Constitutional Court, leaving room for potential amendments to section 117(1)(h) of the UPDF Act to address the identified defects.
She further clarified that the trial of civilians in the GCM remains an ongoing debate, and the procedure for appointing its members may still be reformed to ensure constitutional compliance.
The Supreme Court allowed the appeal by the Attorney General and dismissed the cross-appeal, marking a significant moment in Uganda’s legal landscape.
The ruling reinforces the principle of fairness in the judiciary, particularly concerning military jurisdiction over civilians, and is expected to have wide-reaching implications for future cases involving military trials.
This ruling arrives amidst ongoing concerns regarding the fairness of military trials, especially with opposition leader Dr. Kizza Besigye currently facing treason charges in the General Court Martial.
The case further underscores the need for continued scrutiny of the military court system, particularly as it relates to the trial of civilians under Uganda’s constitution.