~Rogers Micheal🇺🇬~

Aspiring lawyer.
Good fearing and enthusiastic...

[~Rogers Micheal🇺🇬~ @rojaaa18]

The message to Uganda as a nation is simple.... Let's invest in modern sports.... Set up those Academies already cose there's lot of potential out there.......the Federation should do better honestly...

[~Rogers Micheal🇺🇬~ @rojaaa18]

@now_arsenaI Let the season begin already...

[~Rogers Micheal🇺🇬~ @rojaaa18]

@now_arsenaI This season is gonna heat different from the look of things💥💥💥

[Atukunda Isaac @Atukundaisaac1]

THE REVISED GUIDELINES IN THE CASE OF UGANDA VS COL. DR. KIIZA BESIGYE & OTHERS ARE NOT ONLY UNCONSTITUTIONAL BUT AN ABDICATION OF THE JUDICIARY'S RESPONSIBILITY TO THE PEOPLE OF UGANDA:

Article 28[1] of the Constitution of Uganda provides that:-
In determination of Civil Rights and Obligations or any criminal charge, a person shall be entitled to a fair, speedy and PUBLIC HEARING before an independent and impartial court or tribunal established by Law!

Doesn't this communication contravene the accused person's right to a PUBLIC HEARING as provided for under the Constitution of Uganda?

Courts should be independent and accountable to the people of Uganda in whose name they exercise the Judicial functions! Limiting the public's access to a Court which should ensure a public hearing is infact unconstitutional. Limiting communication gadgets and live broadcasting of the Court proceedings runs counter to the right to a public hearing!

Sandra Day O'connor stated that: "Judicial Independence isn't Judicial privilege. Judges remain accountable to the Constitution and the Law" and in Uganda's case to the people of Uganda.

During the recent trial of Okello, the Judiciary advocated for a public hearing and trial and many Ugandans appreciated the idea.

Why now a sudden change of heart especially in a matter which every Ugandan is seemingly interested in?

My ask to the Judiciary is that it should exercise it's mandate in conformity with the Constitution, the Law, the name of the people and with the norms, values aspirations of the people of Uganda irrespective of the nature of the case.

[Lawpoint Uganda @Lawpointuganda]

The High Court Rules That Loan Clauses Allowing Banks to Change Interest Rates Unilaterally Are Unenforceable Without Both Parties' Consent

The Court found that when company directors or third parties execute a personal deed of guarantee to secure facility lines for a corporate entity, they voluntarily step outside the corporate veil.

It held that the doctrine of separate legal personality does not shield individuals who have signed personal undertakings, and that once default occurs on the principal account, the bank possesses an immediate and independent cause of action against the guarantors personally.

Read more
https://t.co/1dNRo5hVU2

[~Rogers Micheal🇺🇬~ @rojaaa18]

@kktim19 Am in high spirits to attend this engagement. Thank you Mr. Timothy

[Kajja Timothy kashami @kktim19]

Happening this Thursday!
A thought provoking discussion on #Youth and #Sports in #Africa.
Register and be part of a timely discussion examining sport as a pathway to youth employment in Africa.
https://t.co/lFJ2Sk6qEU

[~Rogers Micheal🇺🇬~ @rojaaa18]

Legal roasting.....
Say less😂😂

[ROBA & ASSOCIATES LLP @AssociatesRoba]

🚨 OCCUPIED LAND FOR YEARS… BUILT… PLANTED TREES… THEN ELC COURT DECLARES HIM A TRESPASSER

If you are sitting on land because a group, welfare association, or land-buying company “allocated” it to you, this ruling should make you nervous. In Richard Kaino Kipseret v John Luke Amemo Osiemo & Another, the Environment and Land Court of Kenya delivered a cold, uncomfortable message: occupation is not ownership, and developments cannot rescue a weak claim. In this case, the Appellant had fenced the land, planted trees, and occupied it for years after being allocated the parcel by an association. But when the dispute reached court, everything unraveled, because he had no documents to prove allocation.

The Respondent, on the other hand, walked into court with a title deed, official search, and membership records. That was enough. The Court held that under Section 26 of the Land Registration Act, a registered title remains protected unless fraud or illegality is strictly proved. The Appellant alleged fraud, yes, but allegations without documentary backing collapsed instantly. The Court was unmoved by years of occupation, development, and possession. In one decisive stroke, the Appellant, who had lived on the land, was declared a trespasser, his appeal dismissed, and eviction left standing.

This decision is a quiet warning to thousands of Kenyans currently occupying land allocated by committees, associations, or land buying companies. Courts do not protect possession; they protect proof. And when disputes arise, the question will not be how long you stayed, how much you built, or how many trees you planted. The question will be simple, brutal, and final: Where are your documents? If that question makes you uncomfortable, it may already be time to seek legal advice, before someone with a stronger paper trail walks in and legally removes you.

Kindly repost widely.

[Paul MUKIIBI @pmpaulmukiibi]

Where the registered proprietor’s root title is under challenge, it is not enough to dangle the instrument of title as proof of ownership; the registered proprietor must go beyond the instrument of title and show that the acquisition was legal, formal, and free from encumbrance.

The absence of personal fraud on the part of the registered proprietor does not shield a title derived from an unlawful or defective root, and where the very root of the vendor’s title remains unexplained, the doctrine of innocent purchaser cannot operate to validate an otherwise defective chain of title.

In Clark v Njoroge & 3 others (Civil Appeal No 340 of 2019) [2026] KECA 718 (KLR), the appeal arose from a dispute over land ownership. The appellant’s case was that she had lawfully purchased the suit property in 1994, but an official search later showed that it had first been transferred to the 1st respondent and thereafter to the 2nd respondent. She maintained that she had never sold or transferred the property to the 1st respondent or to any other person. At trial, the Land Registrar testified that, although the green card reflected a transfer from the appellant to the 1st respondent, the parcel file did not contain any transfer instrument evidencing such transfer. The trial court nevertheless found that the 2nd respondent was a bona fide purchaser for value without notice and upheld his title.

In determining the appeal, the Court stated that, where the immediate transfer from the original proprietor is directly challenged and the registry file contains no instrument evidencing that transfer, it is not enough to rely solely on the entries appearing on the green card. Relying on Dina Management Ltd v County Government of Mombasa & 5 Others, the Court reiterated that, where the root of title is under challenge, it is not enough merely to dangle the instrument of title as proof of ownership; the registered proprietor must go beyond the title and demonstrate that the acquisition was lawful, formal, and free from encumbrance.

The Court found that, once the appellant challenged the alleged transfer to the 1st respondent and the Land Registrar confirmed that no transfer instrument from the appellant to the 1st respondent existed in the parcel file, the evidentiary burden shifted to the respondents to demonstrate the legality of that transfer. That burden was not discharged. No sale agreement or transfer instrument between the appellant and the 1st respondent was produced, and the 1st respondent did not testify to explain how he had acquired the property. The Court therefore concluded that the 1st respondent’s title was not lawfully acquired.

The Court further observed that the doctrine of bona fide purchaser cannot be considered in isolation from the legality of the vendor’s title. Referring to section 26(1) of the Land Registration Act and Elijah Makeri Nyangw’ra v Stephen Mungai Njuguna & Another, it emphasised that a title may be impeached even in the hands of an innocent third party if it was obtained illegally, unprocedurally, or through a corrupt scheme. In other words, the absence of personal fraud on the part of the registered proprietor does not shield a title derived from an unlawful or defective root.

The Court added that, once the transfer from the appellant to the 1st respondent was challenged and found to be unsupported by any transfer instrument in the registry file, the 2nd respondent could not rely solely on the register without further inquiry. Where the root of title is under challenge, the doctrine of innocent purchaser cannot validate an otherwise defective chain of title.

The Court ultimately concluded that the trial judge erred in upholding the 2nd respondent’s title while nullifying the appellant’s, since only the appellant’s 1994 title was proved to have been lawfully acquired. The appeal was allowed, the trial court’s judgment and decree were set aside in full, and costs were awarded to the appellant.

[KAGIMU @KagimuDrImran]

I'm an Enrolled Advocate looking for a job in a law firm/organization. I have 2yrs experience in legal related issues, court appearances and all documents required.
Any opportunity preferably in the related field is highly welcomed.

0775794774

Please hire or Repost 🙏

[Topskills Sports UK @topskillsportuk]

🚨💣 𝐁𝐑𝐄𝐀𝐊𝐈𝐍𝐆: The full version of the France World Cup 2026 song has just DROPPED! 🥶🇫🇷🔥

Oh my what.... Fuckkk

[~Rogers Micheal🇺🇬~ @rojaaa18]

@Lovandfear I feel every sentence here describes the personality I possess. This sounds really good

[Justice Esther Kitimbo Kisaakye @JusticeKisaakye]

Why I have written this Open Commentary and letters?

Article 126 of Constitution explicitly provides that all Judges hold and exercise Judicial power on behalf of the people of Uganda. Since the charges I will be facing before the Tribunal arise from my exercising judicial power on behalf of the people of Uganda in the Kyagulanyi @HEBobiwine v Museveni @KagutaMuseveni Presidential Election Petition, it is only befitting that the people of Uganda should be made aware of matters directly impacting on or obstructing the delivery of justice in the country, so they can judge for themselves what is going on and make informed decisions.

Secondly, from the time of the unfortunate and unwarranted grabbing of my reasoned Rulings and Files from the Supreme Court and the locking out of litigants and the public from the Supreme Court on 18th and 19th March 2021 respectively – to date (which is over four and a half years now), I have maintained my silence and made every effort to work through Constitutional and other official channels, to address the issues at hand.

On the other hand, the chosen and preferred mode for my accusers in the Judiciary, and the Judicial Service Commission @JSCUganda has been to operate through the public media. For example, the Judiciary @JudiciaryUG issued a falsified Public Statement about the events of 18th March 2021 to media and posted it on the Judiciary’s website. It also unleashed the disgraced Solomon Muyita, the former Judiciary’s Communications Officer to move around different radios talk show spreading falsehoods about me and making denials/defending the actions of Chief Justice Owiny Dollo @ac_owinydollo.

I also learnt about the submission of the Report of the Judicial Service Commission recommending to the President to appoint this Tribunal from the Monitor Newspaper, before the Report was served on me.

Similarly, I learnt about the appointment of this Tribunal from the same Monitor Newspaper early March 2025. Since this is the preferred method of communication for all actors involved in this process and considering my status as a Judge living in exile without access to the intended recipients of this Commentary, I have found it befitting for me to use the same mediums of communication to inform all the different stakeholders.

#Uganda #UgandaJustice #UgandaJudiciary
#JusticeForUganda #DefendOurConstitution
#AfricaJustice #AfricaRuleOfLaw #ProtectOurJudges
#JudgesUnderThreat #AfricaDemocracy #JudicialIndependence
#RuleOfLaw #AccessToJustice
#HumanRights #JusticeMatters #StandForJustice
#WeWillNotBeSilent #ProtectOurRights #DefendFreedom
#FutureOfOurChildren #RiseForJustice
#JusticeKisaakye
#StandUpToBeCounted
#DefendTheConstitution
#UgandaDeservesBetter
#StopPersecution
#EndImpunity
#JusticeCannotBeSilenced
#AccountabilityNow
#FreedomAndJustice
@ug_lawsociety

[Justice Esther Kitimbo Kisaakye @JusticeKisaakye]

I had the great honor of serving my country and the people of Uganda as a Justice of the Supreme Court.

From March 2021 to the present, I have faced ongoing persecution, retaliation, a coordinated witch-hunt, and even death threats for upholding judicial independence and honoring my judicial oath—particularly in the 2021 #Uganda Presidential Election Petition @HEBobiwine v @KagutaMuseveni

Despite serving on the Supreme Court for 13 and a half years with profesionalism and integrity, I have been denied justice for 4 and a half years. Instead of being protected in the exercise of my duties, I have been persecuted for doing the job I was appointed to do on behalf of the people of Uganda: judging and delivering Justice to parties before me without fear or favor.

If such injustice can be inflicted on me—openly, with impunity, and in broad daylight—what then is happening to ordinary Ugandans who lack visibility and protection? How many have endured, and continue to endure, similar or even worse treatment at the hands of those who hold power?

Anyone who chooses to remain silent is as guilty as the perpetrators.

#Uganda #UgandaJustice #UgandaJudiciary
#JusticeForUganda #DefendOurConstitution
#AfricaJustice #AfricaRuleOfLaw #ProtectOurJudges
#JudgesUnderThreat #AfricaDemocracy #JudicialIndependence #RuleOfLaw #AccessToJustice
#HumanRights #JusticeMatters #StandForJustice
#WeWillNotBeSilent #ProtectOurRights #DefendFreedom
#FutureOfOurChildren #RiseForJustice

[~Rogers Micheal🇺🇬~ @rojaaa18]

@DoreenNasaasira Brother Henry it's too bad that luck isn't on your side cose most people would want to be in a marriage where both spouses hve something tangible to bring on table at the end of the day. Try talking things out I pray God intervenes in your marriage...

[Zero Chills @nyaika256]

Nasty C didn’t come to play

[~Rogers Micheal🇺🇬~ @rojaaa18]

The myth... The Best Rapper..... Ladies and gentlemen

Nasty C.......

[𝗝𝗮𝗺𝗲𝘀 𝗘¹ @emiriatjames]

I joined my favorite rapper NASTY C on stage.

Being the City Lead for the Ivyson Tour in Kampala 🇺🇬 has been an amazing and hugely successful experience

Thank you all for being part & special thanks to Nasty C for coming through

[~Rogers Micheal🇺🇬~ @rojaaa18]

South African and African z finest rapper Nasty C is in Kampala already.