By KT Reporter
The High Court in Kampala has blocked the Uganda Law Society (ULS) from holding its Annual General Meeting (AGM) scheduled for Saturday, October 18, 2025, at Imperial Resort Beach Hotel, Entebbe. The AGM was primarily intended to elect leaders to represent the Society at the Judicial Service Commission and other statutory bodies, as previously mandated in a case filed a year ago by ULS member Lawyer Steven Kalali.
Civil Division Judge Bernard Namanya issued the order on Thursday, also restraining ULS from implementing any resolutions passed during a controversial general meeting held on September 17, 2025. The judge issued a temporary injunction, citing serious legal concerns regarding the composition of the ULS Council that convened both meetings. The Council’s legitimacy is currently being challenged in multiple ongoing litigations.
Judge Namanya found that the Council, as currently constituted, lacks the statutory participation of key members, including the Attorney General and Solicitor General, who were expelled from the Council in 2024. The controversy dates back to September 2024 when Senior Counsel Isaac Kimaze Ssemakadde, now in exile, was elected ULS President. Following his election, Ssemakadde issued Executive Order No. 1 in October 2024, expelling the Attorney General and Solicitor General representatives from the Council.
The current Attorney General, Kiryowa Kiwanuka, has been accused by Ssemakadde and a faction of lawyers opposed to his leadership of incompetence and obstructing lawyers from securing client compensation, among other allegations. However, under Section 9 of the Uganda Law Society Act, both officeholders are mandatory members of the Council by virtue of their positions. This expulsion was successfully challenged in court earlier this year. On February 14, 2025, in High Court Miscellaneous Cause No. 263 of 2024, the then Civil Division Judge Musa Ssekaana (now a Constitutional Court Judge) declared the Executive Order null and void, ruling that any action by an unlawfully constituted Council has no legal effect.
He said decisions must be made by a lawfully convened Council in accordance with the Law Society Act. Despite this ruling, the ULS Council convened a general meeting on September 17, 2025, at Imperial Royale Hotel, Kampala. Notices for the meeting were issued “by order of the ULS Council.” Records show that four statutory members—the Attorney General, Solicitor General, Secretary Munaabi Phillip, and Central Region representative Turyamusiima Geoffrey—did not participate in the decision to call the meeting.
At the September 17 meeting, the general membership allegedly resolved to censure and remove Munaabi and Turyamusiima from the Council, a decision central to the present court case. On September 24, 2025, the same Council issued notice for the AGM scheduled for October 18, 2025, including the election of ULS nominees to the Judicial Service Commission on the agenda. Against this backdrop, ULS members Martha Nabijewa and Tonny Tumukunde filed Miscellaneous Cause No. 267 of 2025 in the High Court, suing the Uganda Law Society and five other respondents, including ULS Vice President Anthony Asiimwe, Arthur Isiko, Samuel Muhumuza, Egaru Omiat Emmanuel, and Eddie Nangulu.
They argued that the Council that convened the meetings was not lawfully constituted. The applicants sought a temporary injunction to stop implementation of the September 17 resolutions and halt the AGM until the legality of the Council is determined. They contended that, under the Uganda Law Society Act, the Council must include the President, Vice President, Attorney General, Solicitor General, Secretary, Treasurer, and four other members. Excluding four of these members rendered both meetings unlawful.
They further argued that the censure of Munaabi and Turyamusiima was conducted without due process, violating their constitutional right to a fair hearing. In response, the respondents, through affidavits from Vice President Asiimwe and CEO Christine Awori, claimed that the September 17 meeting was requisitioned by members under Section 16 of the ULS Act, not by the Council, and that halting the AGM would disrupt the Society’s operations, including the election of nominees to the Judicial Service Commission.
Justice Namanya disagreed, noting that notices for both the September 17 general meeting and the upcoming AGM were issued under the authority of the ULS Council, not individual members. Since the Council was not lawfully constituted, it lacked the legal capacity to make binding decisions. The judge agreed with the applicants that proceeding with the AGM under such circumstances could cause irreparable harm. He emphasized the constitutional significance of the Judicial Service Commission, whose members are partly nominated by the Uganda Law Society, noting that the nomination process must be free from illegality.
Munaabi and Turyamusiima could suffer permanent harm if their removal is confirmed without due process. Although the applicants did not specifically request an injunction against the AGM, the court held that both parties had presented evidence and arguments. Relying on Supreme Court precedents, Justice Namanya ruled that the court could grant an injunction if both sides had a fair hearing.
The court issued two temporary injunctions: one restraining the Uganda Law Society and its officials from convening or holding the AGM on October 18, 2025, or any future date until the main case is resolved; and another barring implementation of any resolutions from the September 17, 2025 meeting. The main case is scheduled for hearing on October 20, 2025.
-URN. Give us feedback on this story through our email: kamwokyatimes@gmail.com
