Bamugemereire raises pertinent issues, but ...

Last week, Justice Catherine Bamugemereire-led Commission of Inquiry into Land Matters, criticised the Judiciary for dishing out judgments that have instead accelerated land grabbing in the country.
Justice Bamugemereire had, in a press statement on October 26, warned that if the Judiciary does not rise up to the occasion, it will be captured wholly by the land grabbers and used as a catalyst of untold social distress arising from pressure on the land. In the statement, the probe team pointed out various incidents where courts have played a big role in fuelling land disputes including naming a judge.
The Judiciary, led by Chief Justice Bart Katureebe, has since hit back at the Bamugemereire-led Commission, castigating her for having raised such sensitive issues in public through a press statement. The Judiciary was of the view that such sensitive findings should have been communicated internally or included in her report to President Museveni.
Yes, the Bamugemereire-led team raised pertinent land issues, including pointing out ways used by powerful government officials to grab land from the vulnerable.
She is commended for exposing corruption and rackets in the land sector. However, the forum used was demeaning of the Judiciary, her judicial career home. Still, we believe that Justice Bamugemereire and the Judiciary should find a way of resolving their apparent conflict amicably. We also believe thatJustice Bamugemereire will take into account the concerns of Chief Justice Katureebe.
At the same time, even when Judiciary feels offended by Justice Bamugemereire’s public criticism of some judges, this should be understood in the context of the very sensitive and often emotional subject matter she is handling.
Of course, the ears of the journalists are on the ground and some issues captured by the probe team will often find their way to the media. Nevertheless, the Commission should restrain from releasing some of their findings through press statements. The inquiry Commissions open criticism of some of the judge’s ruling, while maybe correct, puts the Judiciary in an awkward position.
In any case, the Commission ought to be alive to the fact that not all is lost to any party which gets dissatisfied with a particular court decision. This is because there is always an opportunity for them to appeal to a higher court for justice. This is an issue on which the Judiciary should sensitise the public about in order to avoid causing unnecessary tension and frustration in society.
The Judiciary, which is one of the critical arms of government, should at all times, ensure that its integrity is above suspicion.