jon k brian

The second question all will be looking out for is the issue of the independence, competences and qualifications of those that serve on the military courts. The Supreme Court made damming condemnations of the sitting of laymen to determine questions of law, sometimes with grave sentences including life imprisonment and the death penalty. The bill seeks to cure this in a half hearted manner. The bill renames the Unit Disciplinary Committee to Unit Court Martial and disbands the Court Martial Appeals Court. So now the military court systems consists of the Unit Court Martial, Division Court Martial and the General Court Martial. Qualifications of the Chairperson of the courts; -Unit Court Martial - a holder of LLB and a Diploma in Legal Practice - note - not necessary an advocate of the High Court of some experience -Division Court Martial - shall be an advocate of the High Court - again, no requirement of any years of experience not below the rank of Lt. Col. -General Court Martial - a person qualified to be appointed a judge of the high court and not below the rank of a Brig. Gen. - note - to be a judge of the High Court one must have practiced law for at least 10 years. Other members of the courts - Unit Court Martial - serving military officers - note - no requirement for any legal training. -Division Court Martial - two senior officers, two junior officers, a political commissar and one non-commissioned officer - note - no requirement for legal training General Court Martial - two members qualified to be advocates of the High Court and not below the rank of Col., two senior officers qualified as advocates of the High Court and such number of advocates as shall may be determined by the High Command. Appointment of the members -All chairperson to be appointed by the High Command in consultation with the Judicial Service Commission - note - not clear what consultation constitutes and how it aligns with the mandate of the JSC under its parent statute. There is no corps referencing - leaving an open door to ambiguity and possible illegalities. -Members of the Unit Court Marital - constituted by the Chairperson on a needs basis - when there is a trial. -Division Court Martial - The chairperson can constitute the panel from the list of its members - who, by virtue of their ranks are appointment by the High Command. General Court Martial - appointment by the High Command in consultation with the Judicial Service Commision. Tenure of office All chairpersons serve for three years. The members of the General Court Marital Serve for three years too. For the others, the bill is silent on their terms and they seem adhoc. Independence of the courts The members of the court shall be independent and not subject to any command.

nickopiyo's tweet photo. The second question all will be looking out for is the issue of the independence, competences and qualifications of those that serve on the military courts.

The Supreme Court made damming condemnations of the sitting of laymen to determine questions of law, sometimes with grave sentences including life imprisonment and the death penalty.

The bill seeks to cure this in a half hearted manner. The bill renames the Unit Disciplinary Committee to Unit Court Martial and disbands the Court Martial Appeals Court. So now the military court systems consists of the Unit Court Martial, Division Court Martial and the General Court Martial.

Qualifications of the Chairperson of the courts;

-Unit Court Martial - a holder of LLB and a Diploma in Legal Practice - note - not necessary an advocate of the High Court of some experience

-Division Court Martial - shall be an advocate of the High Court - again, no requirement of any years of experience not below the rank of Lt. Col.

-General Court Martial - a person qualified to be appointed a judge of the high court and not below the rank of a Brig. Gen. - note - to be a judge of the High Court one must have practiced law for at least 10 years.

Other members of the courts
- Unit Court Martial - serving military officers - note - no requirement for any legal training.

-Division Court Martial - two senior officers, two junior officers, a political commissar and one non-commissioned officer - note - no requirement for legal training

General Court Martial - two members qualified to be advocates of the High Court and not below the rank of Col., two senior officers qualified as advocates of the High Court and such number of advocates as shall may be determined by the High Command.

Appointment of the members

-All chairperson to be appointed by the High Command in consultation with the Judicial Service Commission - note - not clear what consultation constitutes and how it aligns with the mandate of the JSC under its parent statute. There is no corps referencing - leaving an open door to ambiguity and possible illegalities.

-Members of the Unit Court Marital - constituted by the Chairperson on a needs basis - when there is a trial.

-Division Court Martial - The chairperson can constitute the panel from the list of its members - who, by virtue of their ranks are appointment by the High Command.

General Court Martial - appointment by the High Command in consultation with the Judicial Service Commision.

Tenure of office

All chairpersons serve for three years. The members of the General Court Marital Serve for three years too. For the others, the bill is silent on their terms and they seem adhoc.

Independence of the courts

The members of the court shall be independent and not subject to any command.

414

147

40K

jon k brian @jonbrian89

over 1 year ago

@Isacmpanga Such can never represent the interests of the majority 🤔

jonbrian89 retweeted

Nicholas Opiyo (Pronouns He/Him)

@nickopiyo

over 1 year ago

The UPDF (Amendment) Bill, 2025 will be tabled in the Ugandan parliament tomorrow by @ObothOboth, the Minister of Defence and Veteran Affairs. It is 143 pages long with 84 clauses - by all means a major overhaul of the UPDF Act. On top of most people’s mind is what it says about trials of civilians in military courts. The bill uses the language of the Supreme Court in respect of trials of civilians - permits it only in ‘exceptional circumstances.’ The bill does not define by what is meant by exceptional circumstances, leaving it to be inferred from the grounds upon which a civilian or non-service person can be trial by the military courts. In clause 30, the bill introduces a new section -117A - to encompass other persons subject to military law. These person are (explanatory notes my addition) -Anyone who accompanies any unit of the army in active service in any place - these may includes spouses, children, any member of a household, or any person staying with or accompanying a unit in active service. -any person serving the army on engagement by which the person has agreed to be subject to military law -t it is unclear what engagement would include as it is not defined in the definition section of the bill. My extrapolation would include contractors, service providers et al. -a persons in unlawful possession of equipment or ammunition ordinarily the monopoly of the UPDF. They go to great length to list these items in clause 82 - schedule 7A and 7B. Curiously, these includes firearms that can be licensed under the Firearm Act such as Pistols, AK-47. The list also includes ammonium nitrate that can bear found in large industrial complexes and research labs. It is also a widely used salt of ammonia and nitric acid, primarily employed in agriculture as a nitrogen-rich fertilizer. It's also a component of explosives, used in mining, quarrying, and civil. The list in 7B is far more elaborate and is not solely based on regalia. For instance Kaunda suits in love green, sky blue and coffee brown is now a preserve of the armed forces. -any person who aids and abets a person subject to military law to commit murder, aggravated robbery, kidnap with intent to murder, treason, misprision of treason and cattle rustling. The thing to note here is that you have to committed the crime in aiding or abetting a person subject to military law. It could be a solider or any other person in the list above. - any person found in possession of, sells or wears a uniform of the UPDF, found in possession of classified stores, arms or equipment the ordinary preserve of the UPDF. -a person serving in a force outside Uganda. My preliminary conclusion The question that arise is what is exceptional about the circumstances described above to bring one within the jurisdiction of military law. Save for military equipment, the rest seems pretty ordinary to warrant them to be termed exceptional circumstances. The second question is whether these comply with the ruling of the court. Essentially, it restated what was in the old law and imported what was in the regulations into the Act. It does not seem like compliance by any stretch of imagination, rather a clever attempt at disguising its disregard of the Supreme court directives and orders.