The Ssemakadde court case will go ahead after the Chief Magistrate’s Court at Buganda Road rejected Isaac Kimaze Ssemakadde’s request to pause his criminal trial. Former Chief Magistrate Ronald Kayizzi ruled that the application was fatally flawed. He also stressed that filing a constitutional petition does not automatically stop criminal proceedings—only the Constitutional Court can order such a pause.
Ssemakadde, the self-exiled president of the Uganda Law Society, faces charges under Section 115(3) of the Penal Code Act. Authorities accuse him of indecently insulting Justice Jane Frances Abodo. The charge relates to comments he allegedly made in November 2024 while Abodo served as Director of Public Prosecutions.
According to court documents, Ssemakadde called her “a vagina from Karamoja, a dead wood, a dimwit, and a shameless careerist.” He reportedly made these remarks during a meeting at the People’s Front for Freedom offices in Katonga Village, Kampala.
Ssemakadde asked the court to suspend the trial until the Constitutional Court decides whether Section 115(3) is constitutional. He claimed that continuing the case would violate his right to a fair hearing. However, private prosecutors Tonny Tumukunde and Joshua Byamazima quickly objected. They argued that the supporting affidavit came from someone who was not a qualified lawyer.
The affidavit was sworn by Brian Akandwanaho, who said he represented Ssemakadde. But the Chief Registrar confirmed in a September 10, 2025 letter that Akandwanaho was not an enrolled advocate. Magistrate Kayizzi agreed this was a serious flaw. “A non-advocate cannot act as counsel,” he said. “He also cannot swear affidavits on legal matters.” Without a valid affidavit, the application had no legal foundation.
Later, Ssemakadde’s team tried to fix the problem. They filed a new Notice of Motion with an affidavit from Rogers Ntale, a licensed advocate. But the court rejected this too. Kayizzi explained they never asked for permission to amend the filing. “This was not a small correction,” he said. “It completely rebuilt the application—and you cannot do that without the court’s leave.”
The magistrate also dismissed arguments based on Section 14A of the Advocates (Amendment) Act. He clarified that this law does not apply when someone falsely acts as a lawyer from the start. Even if the paperwork had been correct, Kayizzi added, the request would still fail. “Filing a constitutional petition alone does not stop a criminal trial,” he stated.
In his final orders, Kayizzi dismissed the entire application. He upheld the preliminary objection, struck out the amended filings, and ordered Criminal Case No. 913 of 2024 to proceed. He made no order on costs.
This ruling clears the way for the Ssemakadde court case to move to trial. It also reaffirms a key legal rule: constitutional challenges do not automatically freeze criminal cases. Defendants must get explicit approval from the Constitutional Court to pause proceedings.
READ: Uganda Law Society Breaks Neutrality, Endorses Opposition Candidates for 2026
