Mabirizi Kiwanuka v Attorney General
Mabirizi Kiwanuka v Attorney General (Miscellaneous Application No. 89 of 2022) [2022] UGHCCD 71 (1 April 2022)
The applicant failed to establish any factual basis for actual, imputed, or apparent bias as required under Rule 7 of the Recusal Practice Directions. The mere fact that previous rulings have been adverse to the applicant does not, in itself, constitute evidence of bias. Allegations of personal vendetta or improper association with another judge were speculative and unsupported by facts. The court found that none of the definitions of bias—actual, imputed, or apparent—were satisfied in this case. The principle that justice must be seen to be done applies to all parties and observers, not sole…
Source excerpt
- Judicial Recusal
- Impartiality Of Judges
- Bias Allegations
- Practice Directions On Recusal