The Constitutional Court has dismissed a petition that sought to change Uganda’s divorce law and allow couples to separate without giving reasons. This case revolved around sections of the Divorce Act that require anyone seeking a divorce to prove why they want their marriage dissolved.
In the lead judgment, Justice Hellen Obura explained that granting divorces without asking for reasons would go against the spirit of Uganda’s Constitution. She noted that the Constitution values family, marriage, and children, and these are ideals that the law must protect.
According to her, introducing “no-fault divorces” would be the same as rewriting the country’s divorce law without giving Ugandans a chance to participate in the discussion. She stressed that such a big change should only be made through Parliament after wide consultation with the public.
The petitioners, who included Innocent Ngobi, lawyer Nicholas Opiyo, academic Dr Busingye Kabumba, Isaac Mugerwa, and Stella Nakagiri, had argued that marriage is based on mutual consent. They believed that if one party no longer wishes to remain in the marriage, they should be free to leave without having to justify themselves.
They also challenged sections of the law that protect only the wife’s property during divorce proceedings, saying this was unfair to men.
Justice Obura dismissed most of their arguments, warning that making divorce too easy could undermine social order in Uganda, a country where religion and family values play a central role. However, she agreed that the law was discriminatory when it came to property rights. She recommended that Parliament amend the law to ensure that property protections during separation apply equally to both husbands and wives.
Her judgment was backed by justices Asa Mugenyi, Moses Kawumi Kazibwe, and Eva Luswata. But Justice Fredrick Egonda-Ntende disagreed with the majority on one key point. He argued that once consent in a marriage has broken down, courts should not have to question the reasons for divorce. Even so, he agreed with the rest of the bench that property rights should be equal for both spouses.
In the end, the ruling means that Uganda will continue to operate under a fault-based divorce system, where couples must give reasons such as adultery, cruelty, or desertion to end their marriages. But it also opens the door for possible reform in Parliament to make property laws fairer for both men and women.
