Law
Inaugural Makerere Law Journal Symposium held
The Makerere University School of Law (SoL) held the Inaugural Makerere Law Journal (MLJ) Symposium on 17th June 2022 under the theme, ‘Charting the Course and Diversifying Scholarly Content’. The symposium was held to give opportunity to authors of outstanding papers in recent issues of the MLJ to present their work to the general membership of the Makerere Law Society (MLS) and the public. The symposium was supported by the Public Interest Law Clinic (PILAC), SoL.
The MLJ is a student-edited law journal published by the SoL under the auspices of the law students’ union, MLS. The journal founded in 1971 considers submissions from legal writers, students, and scholars within Uganda and beyond. Quoting the pioneer editor of the MLJ, Daniel Omara Atubo, ‘the journal was intended as a medium for discourse on the immense problems of law’. The submissions may be for education purposes; aimed at causing law reform in the jurisprudence of Uganda or other African jurisdictions on matters of legal doctrine and philosophy; human rights; public policy; governance; economics among others.
Previously, the MLJ was printed annually, however, it is now a free-access online publication that considers, reviews and publishes submissions on a rolling year basis throughout the year. Access issues of the MLJ here: https://makererelawjournal.org/. At the inaugural symposium four papers were presented and interrogated by subject experts. Highlights of the papers are detailed below.
Tukwatanise Hans Rwantangare presented his paper titled, ‘A Case for The Application of the Theory of Deferred Indefeasibility in Uganda as an Instrument to Promote Indefeasibility of Title Under the Registration of Titles Act’. Abstract: The theory of deferred indefeasibility as opposed to immediate indefeasibility is presented as a means to improve security of title today. A comparison is made of the relative merits and demerits of the two theories of deferred and immediate indefeasibility. In so doing, the aim is to reconcile the outdated theory of immediate indefeasibility with the modern legal regime and to preserve its relevance in the prevailing socio-economic situation. In a comparative analysis, other jurisdictions, especially Canada are studied to ascertain how they have evolved their interpretation of the same. Inevitably, indefeasibility, as a concept of real property is analysed considering human rights perspectives as relatively impacted by the two theories.For more about Hans’ paper click: https://makererelawjournal.org/view-publication/35. The paper was discussed by Dr. Rose Nakayi, Senior Lecturer at SoL. Dr. Nakayi is a seasoned expert in land law and rights and an advocate for the reform of the mailo land tenure system.
Fatumah Ramathan-Nabulya presented her paper which had reviewed a case Baryamureeba V Kabakonjo Abwooli. In her review she argued that it was ‘A Win for Women’s Property Rights in Cohabitation’. Abstract: Marriage, especially at its dissolution, tends to be contentious owing to its cross cutting effects on property rights, children custody, spousal maintenance among others. It is more complex when that “union” is not legally recognized. Over 65% of Uganda’s couples are left out under the law because their arrangements are not contracted in accordance with the laws provided for. This potentially subjects women to unequal social laws (patriarchy) usually with no legal remedies. Hence, marriage, due to its overarching effects, can be breeding ground for the entrenchment of gender inequality. This paper reviews a High Court decision through which judicial activism is employed to lessen the plight of cohabiting women. Due to the time they have been in operation, it is often difficult to see our matrimonial laws for what they really are; patriarchal and gender indiscriminate. There is need for Judges to be fully alive to the history of these laws and the debates that led to their passing, to correct the wrongs of history.For more about Fatumah’s paper click: https://makererelawjournal.org/view-publication/23. Dr. Diana Musoke, Senior Lecturer, Islamic University in Uganda and expert on family law discussed the paper.
‘The Human Rights Implications of Uganda’s Borrowing’ paper was presented by Ruth Muhawe. Abstract: The relationship between the sovereign debt of developing countries and the protection of the social rights of citizens in those countries has received considerable analysis from the economic, political and moral perspectives, but relatively little has been written from the legal point of view. Consequently, this paper provides legal insights into the lingering crisis that sovereign debt poses to human rights, with a specific focus on the economy of Uganda. The paper is particularly concerned with examining what Uganda’s debt burden means for the basic observance and enjoyment of human rights by its citizens of both the present and the future.For more about Ruth’s paper click: https://makererelawjournal.org/issues (MLJ 2019 Issue) A constitutional law and international law expert, Dr. Busingye Kabumba, Senior Lecturer at SoL was the discussant of the paper.
A joint paper titled, ‘The Legal Risks of Cryptocurrency On State Sovereignty; A Case Study of Uganda’ was presented by Ntamugabumwe Victor & Joshua Kingdom. Abstract:State sovereignty is conventionally known to mean that all states are equal under Public International Law, the decisive criterion being effective power over territory and people. Indeed, the most rudimentary definition of a state is the organization of power over territory and people within that territory. However, sovereignty today depends much on the state’s monetary independence – the state’s capacity to control the flow of money and currency in their jurisdiction. With the constant evolution of money transactions from Cash to credit and then to crypto, the state must always be ready for each revolution so that sovereignty is kept. Cryptocurrencies work outside the existing legal financial framework and as such avoid the state’s invented structure to control their monetary policies, stability to achieve sovereignty.For more about the paper click: https://makererelawjournal.org/view-publication/17
The Public Interest Law (PILAC) held its 13th Clinical Legal Education (CLE) Moot on 14th May 2026 in the Makerere University School of Law (SoL) Moot Court Room. The CLE Moot is one of the clinical activities forming part of the experiential learning approach used by PILAC in its CLE class.
This Moot gives CLE students the opportunity to build their court advocacy skills, including case research and preparation, oratory and case presentation, court etiquette and teamwork, among others. This is in addition to exposing students to emerging areas of law and legal dilemmas that require specialised legal knowledge and talent to resolve. The uniqueness of this Moot lies in the fact that it is presided over by real judges, drawing mainly from the High Court. This is a result of the collaboration between the School of Law and the Judiciary of Uganda.
The Case and Arguments
This year, the theme of the moot was, ‘Rapid Economic Liberalisation and Urban Growth as drivers of inequity, weakened accountability, strained public infrastructure, and conflict between traders and the state’.
The Moot was presided over by a panel of three High Court Judges: Hon. Lady Justice Jane Okuo Kajuga, Hon. Justice Isa Serunkuma and Hon. Lady Justice Alice Komuhangi Khaukha. The moot problem focused on two unique and interrelated issues. First were legal questions around public-private partnerships and the nature of the legal obligations they impose on the state. Second, there were questions about the state’s obligations regarding human rights abuses arising from the actions of private actors under public-private partnership arrangements.
A compelling display of legal advocacy, a mock human rights enforcement petition highlighted the rising tide of climate litigation across Africa, tackling the devastating human toll of environmental disasters and the inadequacy of state responses. The fictional case centred on a catastrophic flood that destroyed local businesses, displaced scores of traders, and tragically claimed the lives of a mother and her infant child.
At the heart of the legal arguments was the state’s defence: a flat-rate compensation package that critics argued barely scratched the surface of the community’s profound losses. The petition cut straight to a definitive and increasingly urgent question facing the African continent: When climate-related disasters hit already vulnerable communities, and the state fails in its constitutional duty to protect the right to a clean and healthy environment, what does the law actually require? The answer put forward by the petitioners was unwavering: the law requires a meaningful, comprehensive remedy—not mere sympathy, and certainly not token payments.
While climate litigation in Africa is still in its infancy, legal scholars note it is growing rapidly out of sheer necessity. As environmental obligations are too often treated by governments as aspirational goals rather than enforceable duties, the courtroom is emerging as a vital arena to bridge the gap between state promises and true accountability.
Highlights of the Competition and Recognition of Best Performers
A total of 30 students participated in the Moot, under three teams: Applicants, Respondents, and Amicus. After weeks of preparations, the students wore their lawyers’ robes and had the chance to appear before the panel of judges, each presenting their arguments in a passionate and eloquent manner.
At the end of the competition, the judges gave their feedback, expressing appreciation for the level of performance and preparedness of the teams. Some were complimented for performing better than some of the advocates who appear before the judges in court. The judges also provided tips and guidance for the purpose of enabling the students to improve their performance.
In his remarks, Professor Christopher Mbazira, the PILAC Coordinator, commended the students for their hard work and appreciated the judges for taking time off their busy court dockets to support the School in skilling the young future legal professionals. Each of the judges was recognised with a plaque of appreciation.
For his exceptional performance, Mayanja Owen was named Best Oralist of the competition. The Amicus team were recognised as the winning team from the presentations. Reflecting on the weight of the subject matter, the participating students expressed deep gratitude to the judging panel, their teammates who shared the immense burden of the case, and the instructors who guided them through weeks of demanding preparations.
-
Agriculture & Environment1 week agoTribute To Professor Abwoli Yabezi Banana (1951–2026)
-
General6 days agoFreshers’ Joining Instructions 2026/2027
-
General1 week agoSylas Ruhweza: A Brief Life Marked by Meaningful Accomplishments
-
General1 week agoHundreds attend Sylas Ruhweza’s Requiem Mass
-
General1 week agoMakerere University Pushes for Stronger Support for Research Ethics Committees amid Growing Research Demands