Today the High Court has reaffirmed the principle that public bodies and decision-makers must act strictly within the powers conferred upon them by law. Any action taken outside this authority is illegal, ultra vires, and void.
Justice Musa Ssekaana (as he then was) has ruled in the case of Mugisha v Uganda Law Society & 7 Others (Miscellaneous Cause 263 of 2024) [2025] UGHCCD 14 (14 February 2025) that the Uganda Law Society (ULS) Council and its Secretary acted beyond their legal mandate in suspending certain council members and appointing an "Interim Secretary," a position not recognized under the Uganda Law Society Act or its Charter.
The Secretary of the ULS Council (3rd respondent) suspended the President and Vice President without legal authority.
In retaliation, the ULS President- Isaac Semakadde and Council suspended the Secretary and Central Region Representative, also without lawful basis.
Justice Ssekaana has held that the Uganda Law Society Act does not empower any individual or council to unilaterally suspend elected members.
That the ULS Council cannot remove fellow elected members arbitrarily. Any removal must follow proper legal processes, including a vote of no confidence by the General Meeting.
Attempts to "sanitize" unlawful actions through an improperly convened Extraordinary General Meeting were null and void.
Procedural Impropriety and Lack of Fair Hearing
The court further held that suspended members were not accorded fair treatment, violating Article 42 of the Constitution, which guarantees procedural fairness in administrative actions.
The court found the appointment of an Interim Secretary illegal, as the ULS Act and Charter do not recognize such a role.
The appointment violated good governance principles and disrupted the proper functioning of the ULS.
Court’s Conclusion
All suspensions and decisions taken without legal authority are declared null and void.
ULS must operate strictly within the Uganda Law Society Act and Charter.
The rule of law prohibits arbitrary decisions by leadership or "executive orders" that bypass legal frameworks.
Read the full decision below
Implications
This ruling serves as a strong precedent for ensuring proper governance within professional bodies.
It reinforces that:
✅ Elected officials cannot be arbitrarily removed without due process.
✅ Public bodies must operate within their legal mandates.
✅ Procedural fairness is a mandatory requirement in administrative decisions.
.jpg)
Comments