The High Court has stayed the implementation of orders issued by the Law Council Disciplinary Committee against lawyer Richard Buzibira.
Justice Simon Peter Kinobe of the Civil Division of the High Court issued an order suspending the Law Council’s decision striking Buzibira off the roll of advocates.
“The execution of all orders of the Disciplinary Committee of the Law Council in LCD No. 94 of 2017 are hereby stayed pending the hearing and determination of Miscellaneous Appeal No. 0007 of 2026,” the court order reads.
The orders, issued on Monday, May 25, 2026, arise from an appeal filed by Buzibira challenging the disciplinary committee’s decision.
On May 13, 2026, the Law Council Disciplinary Committee struck Buzibira off the roll of advocates over alleged professional misconduct.
The now-suspended orders had directed Buzibira to stop legal practice, pay Shs10 million to the complainant, Pastor Daniel Walugembe, cover legal costs incurred by the complainant, and pay Shs2 million in costs to the Law Council.
According to documents filed in court, Buzibira argues that he was condemned unheard.
He contends that he was denied the opportunity to testify before the committee and was not allowed to cross-examine the complainant before the decision was made.
“I was neither given an opportunity to be heard in my defence nor allowed to cross-examine the respondent (Walugembe) on all allegations made by him before the committee’s decision was made. Neither my lawyers nor I were served with the hearing notes for the day when the Disciplinary Committee decided to hear the complaint in my absence,” Buzibira states in his sworn affidavit.
He further argues that the police report relied upon by the committee was never tendered by its author and was not subjected to cross-examination.
“The Disciplinary Committee based its decision on a report whose author did not tender it before the committee and whose contents had never been tested through cross-examination before any court,” the affidavit states.
Buzibira also claims that the committee relied on a consent judgment entered into by the complainant and one Sunday Joseph, despite the fact that neither the Ministry nor the Uganda Land Commission were parties to the consent judgment.
Meanwhile, Buzibira’s appeal is expected to be heard and determined by a panel of three High Court judges who are yet to be appointed.
Top of Form
Bottom of Form
