On several occasion Mr Museveni criticised civilian courts for granting bail or remanding suspects highlighting a broader tension between the executive and judiciary.
President Museveni's stance on trying civilians in the General Court Martial (GCM) raises significant legal, ethical, and practical questions.
While he justifies this practice as a means to address case backlogs in civilian courts and ensure swift justice in gun-related offenses, the implications for the Judiciary and adherence to the rule of law remain contentious.
Mr Museveni argues that the GCM is critical for the stability of the country, particularly in regions like Karamoja, by swiftly addressing gun-related crimes. He describes the military courts as a "reinforcement" to civilian courts, especially where these courts are perceived to be overwhelmed by backlogs.
He emphasizes that individuals who acquire firearms with malicious intent should not benefit from the "slow" processes of civilian courts. The GCM, according to Museveni, is better equipped to handle these cases expeditiously, ensuring public safety and deterrence.
Mr Museveni highlights the role of military courts in regions like Karamoja, claiming they have reduced violence and restored order. He cites the detainment of armed youth as an example of the GCM's effectiveness in removing dangerous individuals from society.
To mitigate concerns about judicial overreach, the President notes that superior courts have the power to rectify errors made by military courts.
When you make sense of the President's stance it has no place Constitutionally and in Human Rights angle, Uganda's constitution guarantees the separation of powers and the right to a fair trial. Critics argue that trying civilians in military courts undermines these principles, as military courts are designed for members of the armed forces and not civilians.
On several occasion Mr Museveni criticised civilian courts for granting bail or remanding suspects highlighting a broader tension between the executive and judiciary. His remarks may erode public confidence in the Judiciary's independence and impartiality.
While Mr Museveni argues that civilian courts are overwhelmed, shifting cases to the GCM does not address the root causes of judicial inefficiency. If military courts become overburdened, they may face the same delays, compromising their effectiveness.
Allowing the GCM to try civilians sets a dangerous precedent that could be exploited to suppress dissent or target political opponents under the guise of maintaining stability.
Some of notable Cases of where the President disagreed with Civil Courts include of murders which occurred in Entebbe where several women were killed, the murder of prominent public figures which marred the country between 2013 to 2019 including that of State Prosecutor Joan Kagezi, murder of former Police Spokesperson Felix Kaweesi, former Arua Municipality MP Ibrahim Abiriga, the murder of Muhammad Kirumira, Muhammad Kigundu and several other muslim clerics
But his most enduring conflict with the Judiciary and the rule of law has been on the issue of the right to bail, where Mr Museveni has insisted it should be scrapped or at least for exception in certain cases.
On several occasions Museveni has repeatedly expressed discontent with courts granting bail to suspects of treason, murder, and terrorism, describing it as undermining justice.
Recently, Mr Museveni added the government officials facing corruption offences among those who shouldn't be granted bail
His statements blur the line between the GCM and civilian courts, portraying the former as a complementary mechanism to address inefficiencies in the latter.
This rhetoric appears to justify the continued trial of civilians in military courts, despite the clear distinction between the two systems under Uganda's legal framework. The mixing of roles undermines the judiciary's autonomy and risks creating a parallel system that may not fully adhere to constitutional safeguards.
Mr Museveni's opinion has very serious Implications to the Judiciary and Rule of Law including Erosion of Judicial Authority because his frequent interference and criticism of civilian courts may weaken their authority and independence.
Sign up for free AllAfrica Newsletters
Get the latest in African news delivered straight to your inbox
While some Ugandans, particularly in regions like Karamoja, may support the GCM due to its perceived efficiency, others may view it as a tool for political control.
The case backlog in civilian courts requires systemic reform, such as increased funding, recruitment of judicial officers, and modernization of case management systems. Military courts cannot be a sustainable substitute for these long-term solutions.
Expanding the GCM's jurisdiction over civilians risks abuse, particularly in politically charged cases, and could undermine Uganda's democratic institutions.
President Museveni's advocacy for trying civilians in military courts reflects a pragmatic approach to addressing crime but raises serious concerns about the rule of law and judicial independence. While the GCM may provide short-term efficiency, it is not a substitute for strengthening Uganda's civilian judiciary.
Instead of mixing military and civil courts, efforts should focus on addressing the root causes of case backlogs and ensuring that justice is delivered fairly and in accordance with the constitution.
