The Forum for Democratic Change (FDC) has accused Uganda’s Judiciary of corruption, political interference, and imposing unaffordable bail conditions, warning that the alleged erosion of public confidence in the courts could threaten the rule of law.
In a media briefing held on October 26, 2026, FDC Vice Chairperson Centenary Robert Franco said the Judiciary, which is constitutionally mandated to administer justice, was increasingly failing ordinary Ugandans, particularly those unable to meet financial conditions imposed for bail.
“The Judiciary, which under Article 126 of the Constitution is supposed to be the last hope for the common person, has been walloped by corruption, political capture, and commercialization of justice,” Franco said.
The party argued that cash bail had become a burden for poor defendants and political opponents, turning a constitutional safeguard into what it described as punishment before trial. FDC cited the cases of its president, Patrick Amuriat Oboi, and founding president Kizza Besigye as examples of what it considers excessive bail conditions.
According to the statement, Amuriat was arrested in Tororo in 2019 while meeting grassroots party leaders and charged with unlawful assembly and inciting violence. The party said he was granted cash bail of Shs4 million.
In Besigye’s case, FDC said Buganda Road Chief Magistrates Court imposed cash bail exceeding Shs30 million in 2021 following charges relating to unlawful assembly at Mini-Price in Kampala. He subsequently appealed to the High Court, which reduced the amount, according to the party.
“If leaders can be asked to pay such extortionate amounts, what about the ordinary boda-boda rider, the market vendor, the student? Bail has become a business,” Franco said. The claims and descriptions of the cases reflect the party’s account of the proceedings.
Allegations of political influence
FDC also accused the Judiciary of political bias, claiming that some judicial appointments were influenced by loyalty to the ruling National Resistance Movement (NRM) rather than professional merit. The party alleged that judicial officers handling politically sensitive cases faced pressure from security agencies and the Executive, which it said undermined judicial independence.
It further claimed that the criminal justice system was being used to harass opposition figures through arrests, prolonged remand, prosecution and restrictive bail conditions. The party did not provide independent evidence in the statement to substantiate its broader allegations of political capture or interference.
Case backlog and prison congestion
The opposition party also raised concerns about delayed trials, arguing that prolonged case backlogs had left some accused persons on remand for periods exceeding the potential sentences for the offences they faced. FDC said delays were particularly damaging in politically sensitive cases, where prolonged detention could effectively punish defendants before their cases were concluded.
The party also criticised the continued detention of people accused of petty offences, arguing that some cases could be handled through fines, community service or other non-custodial measures. According to FDC, excessive reliance on detention was costly to taxpayers and contributed to congestion in prisons.
Proposed judicial reforms
FDC proposed a series of reforms aimed at strengthening judicial independence, improving access to justice and reducing the number of people held in detention. The party said it would seek to reform the Judicial Service Commission to ensure that judicial appointments, promotions and transfers were based on merit, integrity and competence rather than political allegiance.
It also proposed guidelines to make bail more accessible, with non-cash bail as the default and cash bail reserved for exceptional circumstances. Other proposals include strengthening the financial and administrative independence of the Judiciary, recruiting more judges, magistrates and state attorneys, investing in additional courts and digitising judicial processes.
FDC further called for strict timelines for hearing criminal cases, particularly bail applications, and the introduction of alternatives to imprisonment for petty offences. The party also pledged to repeal laws it considers draconian and to end what it described as the weaponisation of criminal proceedings against political opponents.
Call for accountability
FDC warned that continued public distrust in the courts could undermine respect for the law and encourage citizens to seek informal or unlawful means of resolving disputes. “If we lose the Judiciary, we lose the country, because people will take the law into their own hands,” Franco said. The party called for judicial officers to be protected from executive and security pressure, arguing that judges should be guided by the Constitution and the law rather than political considerations.
The Judiciary had not responded to the allegations in the FDC statement. The accusations come amid broader public debate about access to bail, judicial independence, case backlogs and the treatment of suspects awaiting trial. FDC’s claims remain allegations and do not, in themselves, establish that judicial officers acted unlawfully or that the Judiciary as an institution is corrupt.
By URN
If you have a story in your community or an opinion article, let’s publish it. Send us an email via editor@peaknews.co.ug. Follow our WhatsApp Channel HERE to see more of our stories.
