Judges share a light photo moment with participating law students after the moot court competitions. Photo | Courtsey
By Joseph Kiggundu
KAMPALA.Islamic University in Uganda (IUIU), Female Campus in Kabojja, has emerged as the winner of the 13th National Inter-University Constitutional Law Moot Court Competition after defeating 17 other universities in a two-day contest in Kampala.
Uganda Pentecostal University (UPU), Fort Portal, emerged runner-up in the competition, which brought together law students from various universities across the country to test their courtroom advocacy and legal research skills.
The final moot court session, conducted on September 25 in Kampala, was presided over by a panel comprising retired Court of Appeal Justice Fredrick Egonda-Ntende, Inspector General of Government (IGG) Aisha Naluzze Batala, Supreme Court Justice Catherine Bamugemereire, and Court of Appeal Justices Geoffrey Kiryabwire and Eva Luswata.
The competition, organised by the Center for Health, Human Rights and Development (CEHURD), was held under the theme: “Reproductive and Gender Justice in Uganda: Navigating Constitutional Rights, Public Interest and Social Values.”
According to CEHURD executive director Fatia Kiyange, the competition was intended to provide law students with a platform to critically examine reproductive and gender justice as a component of social justice and public health.
“Through a hypothetical moot problem, participants will examine the policy, legal and regulatory frameworks as well as the structural, institutional and procedural bottlenecks to accessing reproductive health information and services in Uganda,” Ms Kiyange said ahead of the moot court competition.
A moot court is a simulated court proceeding in which law students argue a fictional legal case before a panel of judges, usually based on written submissions and oral arguments.
The other participating institutions included Makerere University, Uganda Christian University (UCU)-Mukono, International University of East Africa, Kampala International University, IUIU Main Campus, Uganda Technology and Management University, UPU Kampala Campus, Gulu University, King Ceasor University, Bishop Stuart University, and Metropolitan International University campuses in Kampala and Mbarara.
Judges tip students to sharpen court arguments
Before announcing the winner, members of the Bench used the occasion to offer the participating students practical guidance on effective courtroom advocacy.
Justice Kiryabwire compared legal arguments to a football match, telling the students that they needed to identify and score their most important “goals” within the limited time available, which he said is 20 minutes.
“What are those points that the judges who are sitting this side say are goals? You can sit here as a judge and say what happened here, the free kicks were going the other way, the penalties were also going the other way, but nobody was scoring the goals,” he said.
He urged the students to identify two or three key points and lead with them rather than spending too much time on lengthy introductions.
“You have only 20 minutes in which to score all your goals, so your intro should not be too long. I can assure you that if you score your first goal within the first minute, the entire Bench (judges) will wake up and start listening to you, but if you are dribbling, they may even miss your goal,” Justice Kiryabwire said.
He also advised the students to avoid telling judges that they intended to “persuade” them, saying advocates should instead make their arguments and allow the court to reach its own conclusions.
“I heard someone say, ‘My lords, I want to persuade you.’ Is it by force? You make your arguments and leave it to the judges to decide. Try to avoid arguing emotionally,” he said.
Justice Kiryabwire further cautioned the students against presenting their submissions like academic papers, urging them to anchor their arguments in the law and decided cases.
Justice Luswata similarly advised the students to paraphrase facts rather than reading long passages during oral submissions.
“Paraphrase the facts. Did any of you do literature? You have an upper hand to summarise the important parts of the facts and keep referring back to them,” she said.
She added: “Presentation in short and precise sentences is ideal; rather than a rapid and long kind of presentation, it is not good.”
The IGG, Ms Naluzze, also cautioned the students against turning their court submissions into academic presentations.
She, however, commended the participants for demonstrating a good understanding of the facts surrounding the hypothetical dispute.
Moot centred on reproductive health rights
The hypothetical case used in this year’s competition concerned the fictional East African state of Ngetta, which has an estimated population of 70 million people.
The State had been sued over allegations that it had failed to provide emergency health services and enact a legal framework governing young women and girls’ access to reproductive health services.
The applicants argued that the State’s failure exposed young women and girls to foreseeable and preventable health risks and contributed to a high maternal mortality rate.
The students representing the State of Ngetta, in their role as the Attorney General and respondents, denied liability. Among other arguments, they defended age and parental-consent requirements for adolescents seeking contraceptives and other health commodities, arguing that such measures were permissible in furtherance of child protection.
The competition therefore required the students to examine competing questions involving constitutional rights, reproductive health, public interest, and the role of the State in protecting children and adolescents.
As part of the prize, members of the winning university team and the competition’s best oralist will receive a one-year internship opportunity at CEHURD.