Enhancing Access to Justice: Calls for Increased Magistrate Jurisdiction and ADR in Uganda
Uganda’s justice system is facing significant challenges, with a growing backlog of cases and concerns about timely access to justice. Legal experts and judicial officials are calling for critical reforms, including an increase in the pecuniary jurisdiction of magistrates and a greater emphasis on Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) mechanisms, particularly for family disputes.
The Burden on the High Court: A Jurisdictional Dilemma
A key issue highlighted by legal professionals is the outdated limit on the monetary value of cases that magistrates can handle. Currently, chief magistrates can only preside over cases valued up to Shs50 million. This limitation, legal experts argue, is forcing even relatively simple disputes, especially those involving land, to be filed in the High Court.
Senior advocate Mr. Denis Kusaasira explained that a small plot of land can easily be worth Shs200 million, a value far exceeding the current jurisdictional limit for magistrates. This mismatch means that ordinary land disputes, which could theoretically be resolved at a lower level, are instead channeled to the High Court.
The consequence of this is a significant exacerbation of the already overwhelming case backlog at the High Court. With over 50,000 pending cases, individuals seeking resolution for such disputes may face delays of up to a decade. “Increasing pecuniary jurisdiction is not just technical; it is about access to timely justice,” Kusaasira stated during a forum hosted by Elison Karuhanga. He emphasized that the current disparity directly impedes the ability of many Ugandans to receive justice promptly.
Rethinking the Magistracy: Experience and Efficiency
Beyond the monetary limits, reforms must also consider the operational structure of the magistracy. Mr. Kusaasira cautioned against the removal of ranks among judicial officers, arguing that this would undermine the ability to allocate cases based on the experience and complexity of judicial officers.
“Justice is not just about knowing the law, it is about experience,” he asserted. “The more complex the case, the more it requires a judicial officer whose judgment has been shaped over time.” He pointed out that magistrates’ courts already handle the vast majority of cases in the country, indicating the immense pressure at this foundational level of the justice system.
The Annual Judicial Report 2025 provides a stark picture of the workload. Out of 167,353 pending cases, a significant portion remains in the pre-hearing (49%) and hearing (47%) stages, with a smaller percentage awaiting judgment.
Balancing Reforms with Crisis Management
While advocating for an increase in magistrates’ jurisdiction as a critical step towards improving access to timely justice, Mr. Kusaasira also issued a word of caution. He stressed that any reforms must be carefully implemented to prevent unintended consequences.
“We are reforming, but we are also managing a crisis,” he noted. “The High Court backlog is not humanly possible to clear within a reasonable time.” He warned that without adequate planning, expanding the powers of magistrates could inadvertently shift congestion to lower courts, which are already operating under considerable strain.
Furthermore, he highlighted the risk of growing delays eroding public trust in the justice system. When citizens lose faith in the formal court processes, they are likely to seek justice through informal, and potentially less secure or fair, mechanisms. “When people lose trust in courts, they don’t stop seeking justice, they change how they pursue it,” Kusaasira observed.
The Ascendancy of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR)
In parallel with calls for jurisdictional reform, the Judiciary is actively promoting Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) as a vital strategy to alleviate pressure on the courts and provide more accessible avenues for justice.
Chief Justice Flavian Zeija has emphasized that family disputes, in particular, should primarily be resolved through ADR. Courts, he stated, should serve as a last resort for cases where mediation efforts have proven unsuccessful.
Dr. Zeija explained that mediation offers a swifter, more economical, and often more amicable method for resolving conflicts, especially in family matters where relationships often persist even after disputes arise. “If it is a family matter, it can be solved by a religious leader or elders,” he said. He noted that in certain court divisions, such as the Family Division, mandatory mediation has been implemented.
“If you are coming for divorce, issues such as property, children, custody, maintenance and alimony are first handled by mediators,” Dr. Zeija explained. “You can choose a private mediator who is accredited, and their charges are regulated to prevent overcharging.”
The Judiciary’s data indicates that a substantial majority of disputes in Uganda, up to 90 percent, are already resolved outside the formal court system. This often occurs at the community level, with elders, religious leaders, and other trusted figures playing a crucial role in facilitating settlements, thereby bypassing the lengthy and often costly court processes. This existing reliance on informal mechanisms underscores the potential for broader adoption and formal integration of ADR.
