Dispute over courtroom decorum escalates between Uganda Law Society and the judiciary
A directive from Uganda’s bar association ordering lawyers to stop addressing judges as “My Lord” or “My Lady” and to cease bowing in court has drawn a sharp rebuke from the country’s judiciary, which insists it alone sets courtroom protocol.
The Uganda Law Society (ULS) issued the directive in a statement signed by its president, Isaac Ssemakadde. The society described the traditional honorifics as “feudal and colonial” and argued that they elevate judicial officers above citizens, “who are in reality their employers.” The ULS said the “archaic” colonial structure had contributed to the “failure” of Uganda’s judicial system and that such practices “force Ugandans into postures of humiliation as the powerful enjoy comfort and deference.”
Under the directive, lawyers are instructed to use plain forms of address such as “Mr Justice,” “Madam Justice,” “Mr Judge,” “Madam Judge,” “Mr Magistrate,” or simply refer to judicial officers by their surnames where appropriate. The ULS also stated that “all advocates and litigants appearing before any court or tribunal shall stand upright and speak as free citizens,” and that “the practice of bowing or any other form of physical subservience before judicial officers is henceforth prohibited for all members of the Uganda Law Society.”
Judiciary asserts its independence
James Ereemye, the spokesperson for Uganda’s judiciary, responded by dismissing the ULS directive as lacking authority. He told the BBC that the ULS had no power to tell judges “what to do or say” and that the courts would continue to “demand the known decorum” from lawyers. Ereemye characterised the ULS as “just a section of young people who have failed to know the principles of agenda setting in management and administration.” He added that if the society had a point, it should “use the appropriate forum for discussion” and that a good case could then become part of policy.
Ereemye emphasised that the courts are an independent arm of government and cannot be instructed by any outside body.
Colonial legacy in African courtrooms
Like many former British colonies, Uganda inherited its legal system and many courtroom traditions from the United Kingdom. The ULS directive frames the push for change as part of broader reforms aimed at “decolonising justice and restoring dignity to the people.”
The debate over colonial-era courtroom practices is not unique to Uganda. Across Africa, lawyers and legal practitioners have long discussed whether traditions such as wigs and robes should be abandoned as part of judicial system reforms. In 2011, Kenya’s then-Chief Justice Willy Mutunga criticised the judges’ dress code and chose to take his oath of office in a suit. Similar debates have emerged in Zimbabwe, Malawi, and Ghana, where critics argue that some colonial-era court practices and attire are no longer appropriate for modern Africa.
What happens next
The directive from the ULS applies to its members, but the judiciary’s firm rejection means that, for now, the traditional forms of address and bowing remain in place in Ugandan courtrooms. The standoff leaves lawyers in a difficult position: bound by their professional body’s instruction on one hand, and facing a judiciary that insists on maintaining existing decorum on the other. The available material does not indicate whether the ULS plans to challenge the judiciary’s position further or seek a formal policy change through other channels.