In a landmark ruling described as a triumph of justice and the rule of law, Uganda’s Supreme Court has ruled that civilians shall no longer be tried in military courts. This landmark ruling arose out of the case of Attorney General v. Michael Kabaziguruka and finally puts an end to a decades-old practice that subjected civilians to military justice, mostly without due process. The ruling has been welcomed by legal experts, opposition politicians, and human rights advocates as a significant step toward the restatement of civilian supremacy and the protection of the rights of ordinary Ugandans. The trying of civilians in military courts has been in practice since 1971 when Idi Amin seized power.

Amin attempted to consolidate power and introduced stern economic policies that criminalized practices such as black market trading and hoarding. He formed what was known as the Economic Tribunal, largely composed of military officers, to try the so-called economic crimes. As Dr. James Nkuubi, a military researcher and legal scholar, puts it, “most civilians tried under the Economic Tribunal were traders accused of economic crimes.” This marked the beginning of a disturbing trend in which the military increasingly encroached on civilian justice, setting a dangerous precedent that would persist long after Amin’s regime fell. Even after Amin was ousted in 1979, the military continued to be involved in civilian trials. During the tumultuous years of the Military Commission headed by Paulo Muwanga between 1978 and 1986, the Military played a major role in trying and executing political opponents.

This culture of military overreach did not end with the coming of the NRM in 1986. As a matter of fact, the involvement of the military in civilian justice increased, more so in northern Uganda, where the military courts were used to ensure discipline during insurgency. The question of military jurisdiction over civilians was a hot issue during the drafting of Uganda’s 1995 Constitution. Article 209 of the Constitution placed the UPDF under civilian authority and limited the circumstances under which civilians could be tried before military courts. The 1998 UPDF Act expanded the scope of the General Court Martial’s jurisdiction to cover civilians if they fell within particular categories, including being military contractors or assisting military personnel.

That opened the door, according to Dr. Nkuubi, for the UPDF to try anyone – leading to wide abuses and no due process, especially in regions like Karamoja, where cattle rustlers and others were commonly tried in military courts. Then there was the case of Michael Kabaziguruka. Kabaziguruka had challenged his trial in a military court on the grounds that it was in contravention with his constitutional rights. The Constitutional Court ruled in his favor and the government appealed the decision to the Supreme Court. In a historic judgment, the Supreme Court supported the decision of the Constitutional Court in that civilians cannot be tried in military courts.

It also vindicates the constitutional principle of civilian supremacy in which military courts shall not be used as a tool to persecute civilians. The decision was highly welcomed, characterized by many as a momentous turn in the dispensation of justice in Uganda. Legal experts and human rights activists hail the ruling, terming it a milestone in taming the military’s overreach and safeguarding the rights of civilians. Many now want the government to revisit the UPDF Act and ensure that it is in line with the principles of the Constitution. The judgment has also engendered in many people a belief in a changed commitment to the rule of law and to human rights protection in Uganda. Fair, transparent, and not beholden to the whims of soldiers in fatigues-that’s what justice must be for the ordinary Ugandan.

It sends a signal to a new regime where civilians have confidence that their cases will actually be heard by the civilian courts where due process and constitutional precepts are guaranteed. The decision also sends a serious word of caution to those in power who may think of the military courts as an instrument of political repression and as a way of circumventing the rule of law. Looking ahead, the judgment by the Supreme Court presents an opportunity for Uganda to reflect on the essence of civilian control over the military and protection of the rights of all citizens. It has been a victory for not just Michael Kabaziguruka but for each and every Ugandan who believes in justice, equity, and the rule of law. Though the road ahead may be long and hard, this ruling marks an important milestone toward a better future for justice in Uganda.

This move by Uganda shows the world bold steps toward reform. The Supreme Court’s ruling is a potent reminder that none is above the law and justice always must have its right place in the civilian courts. This is more than a legal triumph for the people of Uganda but a beacon to a more just and fairer society.