Speaker Anita Among, Parliament made pivotal decisions during the processing and passing of the Judicature Amendment Bill 2023.
The proposed expansion of Supreme Court justices from 11 to 21, inclusive of the Chief Justice, faced rejection, contrary to expectations.
Chairperson of the Legal and Parliamentary Affairs Committee, Robinah Rwakoojo, presented a report recommending the deletion of clause 1, emphasizing the committee's stance against increasing the Supreme Court's justices.
Despite Minister for Justice Nobert Mao's plea to raise the number to at least 15, MPs stood firm on maintaining the status quo.
In response to the rejection, Minister Mao asserted, "While we sought a compromise at 15 justices, the House has chosen to preserve the existing number at 11. It is a decision we respect, albeit with reservations."
However, the Parliament did not entirely forego judicial adjustments. MPs advised the Judiciary to implement a court screening system at the Supreme Court for pre-filing case reviews.
Furthermore, they urged the government to scrutinize the Supreme Court's jurisdiction, emphasizing the importance of refining the matters falling within its mandate.
In a surprising turn, legislators embraced an alternative proposal for the Court of Appeal.
Despite a government proposal to increase the number of justices from 15 to 56, Parliament recommended a more measured approach, settling on an increase to 35 justices.
This adjustment includes the appointment of the Deputy Chief Justice, marking a substantial shift in the Court of Appeal's composition.
"The decision to augment the Court of Appeal is a testament to Parliament's commitment to enhancing the efficiency of our judicial system," stated Speaker Anita Among.
This development highlights the intricacies of legislative decision-making, showcasing a delicate balance between preserving the current Supreme Court structure and adapting the Court of Appeal to accommodate an increased caseload.
As the Judicature Amendment Bill 2023 undergoes further scrutiny, the eyes of legal experts and the public remain fixed on the evolving landscape of the nation's judiciary.