Buganda Road Chief Magistrates’ Court has dismissed Isaac Ssemakadde’s application to halt his prosecution over alleged derogatory remarks, allowing the case to proceed. The ruling, delivered by Chief Magistrate Ronald Kayizzi on January 17, 2025, affirmed that a prima facie case had been established against the Uganda Law Society (ULS) chief.
Background of the Case
The case originated from a viral video recorded during a public symposium in Kampala on November 18, 2024. In the footage, Ssemakadde allegedly made derogatory comments against Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) Jane Frances Abodo. Lawyers Joshua Byamazima and Tonny Tumukunde filed a formal complaint, asserting that Ssemakadde’s actions violated Section 115(3) of the Penal Code Act. This section criminalizes insulting the modesty of a woman, an offense punishable by up to one year’s imprisonment or a fine.
Ssemakadde’s Defense
Ssemakadde argued that the complaint lacked merit, claiming it failed to demonstrate that an offense had been committed. He also contended that the charge was victim-centered and that the complainants had not consulted the alleged victim, Abodo. However, the court rejected these arguments, with Magistrate Kayizzi emphasizing that under Sections 42(1)(c) and 3 of the Magistrates’ Court Act, any person who believes an offense has been committed may file a complaint, regardless of whether they are the victim.
Court’s Observations
Magistrate Kayizzi ruled that the evidence provided, including a video recording and transcription of the alleged utterances, constituted sufficient grounds to warrant further investigation. He stated:
“On the face of it, the person in the video referred to the DPP, and there is a need for the said person who uttered those words to come to court and explain what he meant by them.”
The magistrate dismissed claims of abuse of court process, affirming the jurisdiction of Buganda Road Chief Magistrates’ Court to hear the case, as the alleged offense occurred within its territorial scope in Kampala Central.
Legal Implications
The court clarified that the offense of insulting the modesty of a woman is indeed victim-centered. However, it is not a requirement for the complainant to engage with the victim before lodging a complaint. This interpretation underscores the broader duty imposed on citizens to report suspected offenses, as outlined in the Magistrates’ Court Act.
Next Steps in the Case
The ruling allows the prosecution to gather and present additional evidence during the trial. Magistrate Kayizzi confirmed that the complaint and supporting documents, including affidavits and a recording, provided adequate grounds for the case to proceed.
By dismissing Ssemakadde’s application as lacking merit, the court emphasized that justice must take its course. No costs were awarded in the matter.
Significance of the Case
This ruling highlights the importance of legal mechanisms for addressing alleged offenses, even when the case involves prominent figures. It also affirms the role of individuals in holding others accountable, regardless of their professional or social standing.
As the case moves forward, it serves as a reminder of the judicial system’s commitment to ensuring that all allegations are thoroughly examined, and justice is upheld.
