At least 100 students at the Law Development Centre (LDC) who failed the recently released Bar Course examinations have petitioned the institution’s management, challenging what they describe as the unfair and punitive application of academic rules.
In a petition dated March 23 and addressed to the LDC Management Committee, the students are seeking urgent administrative intervention to review examination regulations governing supplementary examinations and course repetition.
“We, the undersigned students of the Bar Course, petition the management to exercise its powers under Rule 29 (as amended), together with Rule 34(3), to issue appropriate administrative orders in the interest of justice and relax the strict application of the Rules,” the petition states in part.
Dispute Over Supplementary Exams
At the heart of the dispute is the interpretation of LDC’s examination regulations.
The students argue that under Rule 17(2), a student who fails not more than two Category “A” subjects qualifies to sit supplementary examinations.
However, they say Rules 21(5) and 21(6) provide that a student who fails three Category “A” subjects is automatically deemed to have failed the entire Bar Course, becomes ineligible for supplementary examinations, and must repeat the whole programme.
“This creates a clear distinction between students eligible for remedial assessment and those excluded from it,” the petition notes.
According to the students, the framework effectively treats what they describe as marginal failure as total failure, forcing affected candidates to repeat the entire Bar Course even where they passed most of their papers.
Students Call Rules Unduly Harsh
The petitioners argue that the current framework is excessively harsh, especially for candidates who narrowly missed pass marks in only a few papers.
“Supplementary examinations and the repetition of specific subjects are remedial mechanisms intended to address marginal deficiencies. Denying access to these mechanisms in such cases defeats their purpose and renders the framework unduly punitive,” they argue.
They further say the strict enforcement of the rules creates injustice among students in the same cohort and unfairly disrupts academic progression.
According to the petition, the number of affected students is substantial, and denying them supplementary examinations places unnecessary strain on both learners and the institution.
Remedies Sought
Among the remedies proposed, the students want LDC to:
Waive or relax Rules 21(5) and 21(6)
Allow students who failed Category “A” subjects to sit supplementary examinations
Alternatively permit them to repeat only the failed subjects instead of the entire Bar Course
The students emphasized that their petition is not intended to lower the institution’s academic standards.
“Our petition does not seek to lower the academic standards of LDC but to ensure fair and proportionate application of the Rules,” they wrote.
“The present circumstances call for a purposive and humane application of the Rules. This is a proper case for the exercise of discretion in the interest of justice.”
Wider Appeal for Intervention
Beyond the LDC management, the students have also petitioned the Attorney General, the Uganda Law Society, and Parliament, seeking broader intervention in the matter.
Efforts to obtain a comment from LDC management were unsuccessful by press time.
The petition is likely to reignite debate on the rigidity of Bar Course regulations and the balance between maintaining professional standards and ensuring fairness in legal education.
