THE 2ND AFRICAN CORRECTIONAL SERVICES ASSOCIATION
BIENNIAL CONFERENCE
A presentation on:
ENHANCING ACCESS TO JUSTICE ACROSS THE
CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM: THE EXPERIENCE OF
THE JUSTICE LAW AND ORDER SECTOR.
By:
Hon. Justice Yorokamu Bamwine
Principal Judge, Courts of Judicature-Uganda
COMMON WEALTH RESORT MUNYONYO - 2ND – 5TH OCTOBER , 2012
1
Appreciation
I am grateful to the African Correctional Services Association (ACSA)
Secretariat in Pretoria, South Africa, for the invitation to make this
presentation. The invitation had been extended to the Hon. the Chief
Justice of Uganda. However, he found himself unable to present it due to
travel abroad on official duty. He has gratefully requested me to
represent him at the Conference. Please accept his kind regards for a
successful Conference.
Introduction
Public expectations in the 21st century are high and rightly so. When it
comes to criminal justice, the public is no longer satisfied with a criminal
justice system that is process drive. They want a criminal justice service
that is not only capable of delivering justice in every case as effectively
and efficiently as possible but which is also underpinned by core values
of quality and transparency.
You may all recall that Uganda went through misrule in the 1970s and
early1980s. Rule of law institutions including the Judiciary, the Police,
Directorate of Public Prosecutions, Prisons, Probation, among others,
were extensively run down. In the period before the establishment of the
Justice Law and Order Sector:
 Litigants could be forced to bring their own writing paper to court.
2
 The prisons were over congested - some carrying over 16 times
their approved capacity.
 Police cells were clogged with suspects awaiting trial.
 The courts were suffering under heavy backlogs.
 The average waiting time to be tried on a capital and petty charge
averaged five years and two years, respectively.
 Public confidence in the Judiciary was at its lowest.
The year 1999, marked a significant turnaround in Uganda. In that year,
criminal justice institutions, weighed down by the break down in the
rule of law decided to set up the Justice Law and Order Sector with the
sole aim of initiating and implementing justice sector reforms to remove
impediments to the delivery of justice. These reforms were driven in
part by the chain-linked programme, which had been piloted in Masaka,
one of the districts in Uganda. Under the Chain Linked programme,
criminal justice agencies were brought together under one common loose
organization to find solutions to systemic problems affecting the criminal
justice system.
The Judiciary, the Directorate of Public Prosecutions, the Police Force,
the Prisons Service and the Probation Services together with civic leaders
met under the chair of the Judiciary to discuss and find low cost
solutions to criminal justice problems such as delays, loss of files and
corruption across the chain of justice. This was a fundamental departure
3
from the routine, where each institution worked independently and was
keen to point accusing fingers at the other institution. The chain linked
initiative, emphasized open communication between the institutions,
cooperation and coordination in approaching systemic problems
affecting the criminal justice system.
The initiative worked so well in Masaka that within one year of its
operation, justice institutions had at low cost or even a budget neutral
mode solved most of their problems through communication,
cooperation and coordination.
Motivated by the lessons learned in the chain linked programme,
Government decided to set up the Justice Law and Order Sector to
address the challenges of justice delivery.
The Justice Law and Order Sector (JLOS)
JLOS brings together all institutions involved in the administration of
justice, maintenance of law and order as well as human rights. JLOS
institutions include the Ministry of Justice and Constitutional Affairs, the
Judiciary, the Directorate of Public Prosecutions, the Uganda Police
Force, the Uganda Prisons Service among others. Collectively JLOS
institutions strive to deliver justice to all.
JLOS is a sector wide approach with one common planning, budgeting
and execution framework. JLOS institutions are run using a committee
4
system. At the apex is the Leadership Committee, which is made up of
cabinet ministers and heads of JLOS institutions. The Chief Justice chairs
the Leadership Committee. The Leadership Committee is responsible for
policy guidance and advocacy at the highest political level.
The Steering Committee is made up of Permanent Secretaries of the
different JLOS institutions. It is responsible for policy coordination and
guidance.
The Technical Committee is made up of technical officers. It is
responsible for initiating policy and implementation of the investment
plan.
Thematic working groups, made up of experts from the institutions,
support the Technical Committee. At a local level, there are the District
Chain Linked Committees, which are responsible for addressing
challenges of justice delivery at the grass root level. A secretariat exists at
the Ministry of Justice to coordinate the committees and all the JLOS
programmes.
Operationally, JLOS institutions have one common strategic investment
plan focused on promoting the rule of law through strengthened legal
and policy frameworks for JLOS institutions; deepened access to justice
5
and strengthened observance of accountability and human rights across
the chain of justice.
Collectively, JLOS institutions:
 Identify and find solutions to justice delivery problems;
 Mobilize resources for programmes, take a unified approach to
defend and harness the rule of law;
 Deal with development partners with one voice and address justice
delivery from a results perspective.
Benefits of the Sector wide Approach
I. In a world of scarce resources, the sector wide approach helps
institutions to prioritize resources for the common good of all.
II.
It ensures equitable growth of justice institutions by using
affirmative action for the most disadvantaged institutions, which
is not possible when institutions are left to grow on their own.
III.
It empowers institutions to find solutions to common problems
instead of resorting to finger pointing or the blame game.
IV.
Sector wide approaches to justice delivery help to pull together
diverse functions and talents into a productive whole (sector)
V.
The approach empowers institutions to benefit from synergies of
inter dependence in the delivery of justice.
VI.
It enhances responsibility for results through peer review. Nonperforming institutions are compelled to perform to avoid being
shamed.
6
VII.
It maximizes the benefits of the Government thinking and working
as a whole to avoid systemic breakdown that have been witnessed
in the environment and arms race, where countries took a lonely
approach.
VIII.
The approach enhances the concept that all public office are held in
trust for the people and all persons placed in positions of
leadership and responsibility are, in their work, answerable to the
people (Principle NO.26, National objective and directive
principles of State Policy in Uganda’s Constitution).
Enhancing Access to Criminal Justice – JLOS Achievements
Whilst Uganda still faces challenges of building an effective justice for
all, it has been able through JLOS to register the following results:
1.
Increased proximity to frontline criminal justice services (police,
court, prisons and prosecutions)
2.
Disposal of cases has increased from 12% in 1999 to 48%; while
disposal of cases against registered cases is 144% in 2012. This
performance has led to a complete elimination of criminal case
backlog at Magistrate’s Court level. Case backlog refers to cases
that are more than 2years old in the system.
3.
Congestion in prisons reduced from 500% to in 2005 to 214% in
2011
7
4.
Crime rate reduced from 502 persons per 100,000 in 2007 to 302
persons per 100,000 in 2012 making Uganda one of the countries
with the lowest crime rates in the world.
5.
Conviction rates for the Directorate of Public Prosecutions
increased from 22% in 2000 to 53% in 2012, due to both improved
prosecution skills and strengthened investigation methods.
6.
Public Confidence in the administration of justice increased from
21% in 2005 to 60% in 2012.
7.
The sector wide approach perceives justice from a systemic view
and values all justice institutions as active participants in shaping
the delivery of justice in Uganda.
8.
Recidivism decreased from 72% in 1999 to 26% in 2012.
9.
Average length of stay on remand reduced from 5years to under a
year in 2012.
10.
Pre trial detainees reduced from over 70% to 53%.
11.
A human rights culture has been adopted, addressing the welfare of
inmates and staff in the prisons.
12.
Thanks to JLOS initiatives, between July 1, 2011 and June 30, 2012
a total of 8546 convicts were sentenced to community service. This
indicates the potential contribution of a community service order
as a sentence towards the decongestion of prisons. Our
Community service department through the diversion of offenders
8
who would otherwise be in prison contributed to an estimated
saving of Shs 4.3 billion to government.
Distinguished participants, you may wish to know that the said
department is now taking forward the reform program of delivering a
complete chain of justice that is efficient and effective, by focusing on
outcomes while ensuring quality processes to achieve results. The
department is to that end pursuing a social re-integration approach with
the main focus on re-integration and rehabilitation of offenders.
Lessons learnt during the 12 years of implementing the Sector Wide
Approach
Over the past 12 years the sector has learnt 1. That the delivery of criminal justice is a system that is made up of
different actors acting in concert with each other and that no actor
was greater than the other.
2. That by justice institutions acting together they can address systemic
problems across the chain of justice by promoting communication,
coordination and cooperation among themselves.
3. That common justice problems of delay can be addressed by different
institutions channeling their resources or priorities to streamlining
processes and reducing on redundancies in the system.
4. That adopting a collaborative approach to justice delivers more
dividends than institutions acting alone.
5. That a coordinated approach to resource mobilization and utilization
maximizes value for money.
9
6. That it is easier to innovate or find low cost solutions by acting in
concert.
Challenges:
Notwithstanding the benefits of the Sector wide approach, the Country
still faces some challenges. They include:
 Pre-Trial Delays – mostly caused by too many cases each year for
the limited number of judicial officers at all levels.
 Life means life - where the highest court has held (Tigo Stephen
vs Uganda) that
“life imprisonment means – imprisonment for the natural
life term of a convict, though the actual period of
imprisonment may stand reduced on account of remissions
earned” and yet Judges believe life means life so the issue
of remission shouldn’t arise. As for UPS, they are unsure
whether Judges have the power to order that a life sentence
means the rest of the prisoner’s natural life. This may need
to be reconsidered by the Supreme Court.
 “Without remission” sentences: The Kigula decision makes the
Uganda Prison Service (UPS) question whether Judges have the
power to order that a sentence should be served without
remission. Not only does the Prisons Act give responsibility for
remission to the UPS, there is argument that if the Courts
10
effectively strip them of this power, this limits UPS’s ability to
ensure good behavior in prisons. Judges believe that sentences
should be determined by Judges, not UPS, whereas UPS is
concerned about effect on morale and discipline by denial of
remission and other ‘excessive’ long sentences ( 50, 60,70 years,
etc) described in some quarters as “judicial mob justice”.
Attitude: “They (Judges) keep files, we (UPS) keep people”
 Re-sentencing hearings (after Susan Kigula case) – where some
Judges refuse to consider post – conviction mitigation which
some quarters believe is irrational and counter- productive.
Those who think that it is counter – productive argue that by
refusing to consider rehabilitation in prison, Judges send a
message to other prisoners that they have nothing to gain by
seeking to improve them selves while in prison.
1. Quality of defence counsel – feeling being that counsel on state
briefs are either recent law graduates with insufficient
experience or ‘failed’ lawyers. Main reason for poor quality
representation being poor quality remuneration due to absence
of a comprehensive Legal Aid Scheme.
2. Probation officers: Lack of an effective probation scheme
whereas Judges think that’s the way to go.
11
The beauty of it is that JLOS is aware of all these challenges and
strongly believes they are surmountable.
CONCLUSION:
JLOS has indeed added value to improvements in access to criminal
justice in Uganda. It has led to a realization that crime has a profound
counterproductive effect on business undertakings, the development of
markets and property rights, all of which are inextricably linked to
physical security. JLOS has demonstrated that the success of one
institution depends on the collective well-being of all.
The sector wide approach may not be the mantra for overcoming
challenges in the delivery of justice but it offers a realistic chance for
countries, which are rebuilding justice to focus their collective energies
on holistic reforms in the justice sector. There can be no doubt that the
country has registered massive improvements in enhancing access to
justice through strengthening all actors in the chain. There is still a need
for massive deliberate investments by Government in human resource
development in addition to providing more resources to JLOS
institutions to discharge their mandates.
Through JLOS potential exists in this Country to build a fair trial model
that could be beacon for Africa in implementing the principles and
guidelines on the Right to a Fair Trial and Legal Assistance adopted by
the African Commission on Human and Peoples’ Rights.
I see strong indications of support for this in the JLOS institutions.
May God bless you all.
12