A push by Uganda’s leading lawyers’ body to abolish colonial-era courtroom traditions has sparked a confrontation with the judiciary, which says it answers to no outside institution.
The dispute follows an executive order issued on Tuesday by the Uganda Law Society (ULS), deliberately released on Saba Saba Day, a date across East Africa linked to resistance against authoritarian rule.
The directive, titled “Abolition of Colonial Court Culture” and numbered Executive Order RNB No. 12 of 2026, instructs lawyers to stop bowing to judges and magistrates and to abandon honorifics such as “My Lord,” “Your Lordship,” “My Lady” and “Your Worship.” The ULS argues these titles are colonial relics inherited from Britain’s legal system and have no place in a modern democracy.
ULS president Isaac Ssemakadde described the customs as “feudal and colonial honorifics” that elevate judges above the citizens “who are in reality their employers.”
The judiciary swiftly rejected the directive. Judiciary spokesperson James Ereemye told the BBC that the courts are an independent arm of government and cannot be directed by an external body. He also dismissed the ULS, describing it as “just a section of young people who have failed to know the principles of agenda setting in management and administration.”
Ereemye said the judiciary would continue to require established courtroom decorum from lawyers and advised critics to pursue reforms through the proper channels.
“If you have a point, you use the appropriate forum for discussion and when you make a good case, it forms part of the policy,” he said.
Under the new order, lawyers are instructed to address appellate judges as “Mr Justice” or “Madam Justice,” High Court judges as “Mr Judge” or “Madam Judge,” and magistrates as “Mr Magistrate” or “Madam Magistrate.” They may also simply use a judicial officer’s surname.
The order also directs advocates and litigants to stand upright while addressing the court “as free citizens,” describing the move as part of a broader effort to decolonise Uganda’s justice system and restore dignity to the public.
Ssemakadde said the reforms would “strip away the theatrical props of elitism” that separate judicial officers from the frustrations experienced by ordinary Ugandans. He argued the changes would force those in positions of authority to confront “the humanity and dignity of the people they serve, or fail to serve,” while ending rituals that require citizens to display excessive deference.
The directive extends beyond courtroom etiquette. It accuses Uganda’s judiciary of systemic problems, including executive interference, corruption, selective prosecutions, prolonged pre-trial detention and military encroachment into civilian justice.
The ULS has also launched a 90-day national consultation involving judges, lawyers and civil society groups to examine whether colonial-era wigs, gowns and foreign legal terminology should remain part of Uganda’s courts. It also plans to rewrite the Judiciary’s Client Charter in clearer, more accessible language.
The order applies only to members of the Uganda Law Society and does not change official courtroom procedures. Judges are therefore under no legal obligation to accept the new forms of address, raising the prospect of courtroom disputes as lawyers test the directive.
The debate reflects a wider conversation across Africa about the place of colonial legal traditions in modern justice systems. In 2011, Kenya’s then Chief Justice Willy Mutunga broke with tradition by taking his oath of office in a business suit instead of judicial robes. Similar debates over wigs, gowns and courtroom etiquette have also emerged in Zimbabwe, Malawi and Ghana, where critics argue such practices are out of step with the values of independent African states.
By: Andrews Kwesi Yeboah