Concerns have emerged over reports suggesting that individuals whose phones ring inside a Magistrate’s Court could face arrest and a fine of UGX 1.3 million, prompting a strong response from Uganda Law Society President Isaac Ssemakadde.
In a statement addressing the issue, Isaac Ssemakadde dismissed the alleged penalties as lacking clear legal grounding and urged the public to rely on formal court processes rather than informal accounts circulating outside courtrooms.
“A ringing phone may be discourteous and disruptive, but it does not suspend the Constitution,” Ssemakadde stated, emphasizing that any punitive action must be anchored in established law and properly recorded court orders.
He questioned whether due legal procedures were followed in cases where individuals reportedly faced consequences for courtroom disruptions.
“Before anyone pays a coin, ask the fundamental question: What is the legal basis for the arrest?” he said.
Ssemakadde further raised concerns over whether there was a formal finding of contempt of court, whether a lawful fine was imposed, or whether bail conditions were set by the court.
He stressed that such determinations should be reflected in official court records rather than being relayed through informal channels.
According to him, the integrity of the justice system depends on strict adherence to transparency and due process.
“No citizen should be deprived of liberty or property without a clear legal foundation,” he said, urging affected individuals to seek court records and legal advice before complying with any penalties.
Legal analysts in Kampala have in recent times pointed to growing public confusion around courtroom etiquette and penalties, especially as courts tighten discipline to maintain order during proceedings.
However, they also emphasize that enforcement must remain consistent with constitutional safeguards.
Ssemakadde’s remarks add to ongoing debates in Uganda about judicial accountability, access to justice, and the balance between courtroom discipline and individual rights.
He concluded by warning against arbitrary enforcement practices, stating: “A courtroom is a temple of justice, not a hunting ground for arbitrary penalties.”