Constitutional Court Bars Magistrates From Screening and Trying the Same Criminal Cases

What the report says

Uganda’s Constitutional Court has ruled that magistrates who first handle private criminal complaints cannot later sit as judges in the same cases. In a decision in consolidated Constitutional Petitions No. 003 and 008 of 2025, a five-judge panel found that the existing procedure under Section 42 of the Magistrates Courts Act allowed one judicial officer to screen a complaint, help shape charges and then preside over the trial, which the court said threatened the constitutional right to an impartial hearing.

According to Nile Post, the judgment was written by Justice Cheborion Barishaki. The court said the process placed magistrates in conflicting roles as preliminary assessor, charge-drafting officer and trial adjudicator. It reasoned that once a magistrate has already formed an opinion about whether a prima facie case exists, a reasonable observer could fear bias if that same magistrate later decides guilt or innocence. The court also rejected the Attorney General’s position that the earlier consultations were only administrative.

The court did not abolish private prosecutions altogether. Instead, it preserved the right to bring such complaints while changing the procedure so that a different person must prepare the formal charge, or the matter may be referred to the Director of Public Prosecutions. It also directed the Attorney General to table a bill within 12 months to amend the law and separate the screening and trial functions. The petitions were brought by lawyers Steven Kalali, Martins Kirya and Michael Aboneka and were filed in the public interest.