Lawyers lock horns in court over Ssemakadde's insults against DPP

Lawyers Wednesdaylocked horns during the hearing of a private criminal prosecution instituted against Uganda Law Society (ULS) president Isaac Ssemakadde by two concerned attorneys- for indecently assaulting Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) Justice Jane Frances Abodo.

A heated session started when Ssemakadde’s lawyers asked presiding Buganda Road Court Chief Magistrate Ronald Kayizzi to determine their application in which they wanted court to dismiss an application that sought to have the ULS president summoned to plead to the proposed charge of insulting the modesty of a woman.

However, one of the complainants in the matter, lawyer Joshua Byamazima told court that they did not serve Ssemakadde’s lawyers with the application- nor made any disclosures, and that they have no locus to proceed in their matter.

"I submit that the respondent's lawyers should not be allowed to appear in this matter at this stage. My colleague Tonny Tumukunde, and I have filed a complaint and affidavit under Section 42 of the Magistrates' Courts Act (MCA), which is pending determination of whether a prima facie case has been made,” he said.

Byamazima added: “Only after this determination can summons be issued, and the respondent's lawyers be granted locus standi to speak. I pray that this court proceeds to determine the prima facie case and adopts our submissions, thereby issuing summons." My Byamazima submitted.”

A team of over 20 lawyers led by Derrick Bazekuketta objected their request and instead raised preliminary issues of law, reasoning that Byamazima’s submission is misconceived, incompetent and does not take into account the provisions of the constitution and the MCA.

Bazekuketta submitted that court guided that there should be full disclosure of the facts known to the applicants and failure to make such disclosure may result into a discharge of any order.

“The applicant must make broader inquiries before making the application. The duty of disclosure may not only apply to material facts known to the applicants but also to any additional facts which he should have known if he had such inquiries,” Bazekuketta submitted.

“What you (magistrate) have before you is a fundamental breach which can only be determined if you hear Ssemakadde. There is no victim in this matter. No one has come out to complain that her modesty has been insulted and no inquiries have been made regarding the victim. How would you know when no inquiries have been made regarding the reaction of the victim unless Ssemakadde owes you that,” he added.

The lawyers emphasized that Ssemakadde should receive fair and just treatment in the investigations stemming from the complaint on oath.

However, Ssemakadde countered that his accusers, Tumukunde and Byamazima, have a history of filing complaints on behalf of others, only to withdraw them later when they realize they've become a nuisance.

Byamazima took exception to the submissions, standing up to accuse Ssemakadde's lawyers of going on a "fishing expedition" and requesting the court to restrain them.

A tense exchange ensued as two of Ssemakadde's lawyers also rose to speak, instructing Byamazima to sit down and allow them to finish their submissions.

The atmosphere became more heated when Byamazima addressed one of Ssemakadde's lawyers, Bazekuketta, as "My learned brother." Bazekuketta promptly corrected him, pointing out that the proper term is "learned friend."

Byamazima repeated the mistake, prompting Bazekuketta to retort: "You must have been a very poor student."

The trial Chief Magistrate set January 17 for ruling on both applications.

The two complainant lawyers claimed that on November 18, 2024 while addressing members of the Peoples’ Freedom Front (PFF) at a symposium on the state of the Rule of Law, Constitutionalism and Human Rights in The Kisumu 36 Tales” held at Katonga Road in Kampala, Ssemakadde uttered the following words “…..that all these things like your particular kaffir form is given legal dressing by this vagina from Karamoja…I have made a case before that we have a pumpkin for a DPP, but some lawyers continue to pretend that she is actually the DPP..she is dead wood….”

Court documents indicate that Ssemakadde made the utterances in full glare of the media as the video with the recordings widely circulated on social media in what’s now a matter of public knowledge to which he (Ssemakadde) should be held liable for.

However through his lawyers of GEM Advocates in his application seeking for the dismissal of the proposed charge against him, Ssemakadde noted that the impugned complaint on oath and supporting affidavit do not, prima facie, disclose commission of the proposed offence and that they are grossly incompetent, frivolous and vexatious a mockery of concern for women rights, a breach of the right to freedom of opinion and freedom of expression and an abuse of the court process.

Ssemakadde argued that the case relies heavily on the victim's testimony, yet prosecutors Byamazima and Tumukunde have not engaged with the alleged victim, Jane Frances Abodo. Without her testimony, Ssemakadde claims there's no reasonable cause to believe the offence was committed.

[email protected]