Judge Bans Live Coverage Of Court Process Between UCU and Its Expelled Students

On the 2^nd of November (Thursday), the Mukono High Court was in session to listen to the oral submission of the parties in the case between Yasin Sentumbwe, and Simon Ssemuwemba (applicants) against Uganda Christian University (UCU) (Respondent). The students sued the university for expelling them after they were accused of leading a demonstration against tuition increment.

Friedrick Mpanga, Counsel for the respondent cross examined the students about the events that led to their expulsion from the university. He challenged Yasin to present evidence to show that the student leaders were not invited to attend the university council meeting where the resolution to pass tuition increment was passed. Other questions were directed to the students. Counsel Isaac for the sued students reexamined Simon to make clarifications where he went wrong during the cross.

The judge also refused to admit new evidence of the video recording of Yasin begging for money on the streets of Kampala because it was not availed to the applicants before court.

The applicants asked to withdraw their claim about the unfairness of their dismissal so that the case is not dragged longer, and maintained other claims such the remedies for the past time spent while in school and the period spent while not studying.

Judge sets ruling dates

Towards the end of the court session, the judge adjourned the case. The parties were asked to make written submissions of their arguments on the 9^th November for the applicants, and that the respondents to submit a rejoinder in 10 days, before the 21^st of November.

The judge tentatively mentioned that she will deliver her ruling on the 21 December depending on the time the submissions of counsel are transcribed and printed.

Students seem to cite bias against the applicants.

On the 19^th of November 2017, the expelled students appeared at court for the hearing of their case. The matter was supposed to be in court on two days, the 19^th and 20^th of the same month. However, the Justice did not appear on those days. Unconfirmed reasons emerged that the justice was away on a conference, while others said she had a health issue.

On the 19^th, students of the faculty of law were asked to attend a career guidance at the university, and that the judge would be the guest speaker of the event. The students while at court were disturbed by this revelation and wondered if the judge was intentionally absconding from court, when she is to appear at the sued university later in the day. The Judge however missed all sessions and failed to make it for the career guidance at the UCU.

The registrar gave the parties a new date for the hearing on the 2^nd of November.  The court on Wednesday (this week) was attended by many media houses who were present to take still images or video coverage of the case. Before the start of the case, the justice of the High Court summoned the journalists to her chambers and cautioned them about covering the session, or else be charged for contempt of court. However, some images were captured before the court session started.

The journalists were only able to take notes with their diaries of the court session.

Some of the people in the court claimed that it is was possible the judge made that decision on the directive of the respondent university, claims this website could not independently verify.

Those who have read some of the judgements of the justice opine that she has some of the best rulings making her one of the few judicial officers that cannot simply be corrupted.