Top Story: Constitutional Court Upholds Mandatory Grounds for Divorce in Landmark Ruling
Kampala — In a pivotal 4-1 decision, Uganda’s Constitutional Court has upheld key provisions of the Divorce Act that require spouses to provide reasons before dissolving their marriage, rejecting a petition seeking to introduce no-fault divorces.
Delivering the lead judgment, Justice Hellen Obura ruled that allowing divorces without a stated cause would undermine the spirit of the Constitution, which explicitly protects the institution of marriage and family.
“The norms, values, and aspirations of the people of Uganda, as plainly stated in the Constitution, protect and preserve the family, marriage, and children,” Obura stated. She emphasized that overhauling the divorce law without public consultation would bypass Parliament’s constitutional role in lawmaking.
The petitioners — Innocent Ngobi, Nicholas Opiyo, Isaac Mugerwa, Dr. Busingye Kabumba, and Stella Nakagiri — challenged multiple sections of the Divorce Act, arguing that compelling individuals to give reasons for divorce infringes on personal liberty and undermines the principle of mutual consent in marriage. They also criticized the law for offering property protections only to wives during divorce proceedings.
While the court upheld the requirement for grounds in divorce cases, it agreed with the petitioners that the current law is discriminatory in protecting only the wife’s property during separation. Justice Obura recommended legal reforms to extend these protections equally to husbands.
Joining Obura in the majority were Justices Asa Mugenyi, Moses Kawumi Kazibwe, and Eva Luswata. Dissenting, Justice Fredrick Egonda-Ntende argued that once mutual consent breaks down, courts should not need to inquire into the reasons for divorce. However, he concurred that property protections should apply to both spouses.
The ruling reaffirms the role of Parliament in shaping Uganda’s family law and signals that any shift toward no-fault divorce must be the product of wide public and legislative debate.
